4,373 research outputs found
Empirical Evaluation of Mutation-based Test Prioritization Techniques
We propose a new test case prioritization technique that combines both
mutation-based and diversity-based approaches. Our diversity-aware
mutation-based technique relies on the notion of mutant distinguishment, which
aims to distinguish one mutant's behavior from another, rather than from the
original program. We empirically investigate the relative cost and
effectiveness of the mutation-based prioritization techniques (i.e., using both
the traditional mutant kill and the proposed mutant distinguishment) with 352
real faults and 553,477 developer-written test cases. The empirical evaluation
considers both the traditional and the diversity-aware mutation criteria in
various settings: single-objective greedy, hybrid, and multi-objective
optimization. The results show that there is no single dominant technique
across all the studied faults. To this end, \rev{we we show when and the reason
why each one of the mutation-based prioritization criteria performs poorly,
using a graphical model called Mutant Distinguishment Graph (MDG) that
demonstrates the distribution of the fault detecting test cases with respect to
mutant kills and distinguishment
Time-Space Efficient Regression Testing for Configurable Systems
Configurable systems are those that can be adapted from a set of options.
They are prevalent and testing them is important and challenging. Existing
approaches for testing configurable systems are either unsound (i.e., they can
miss fault-revealing configurations) or do not scale. This paper proposes
EvoSPLat, a regression testing technique for configurable systems. EvoSPLat
builds on our previously-developed technique, SPLat, which explores all
dynamically reachable configurations from a test. EvoSPLat is tuned for two
scenarios of use in regression testing: Regression Configuration Selection
(RCS) and Regression Test Selection (RTS). EvoSPLat for RCS prunes
configurations (not tests) that are not impacted by changes whereas EvoSPLat
for RTS prunes tests (not configurations) which are not impacted by changes.
Handling both scenarios in the context of evolution is important. Experimental
results show that EvoSPLat is promising. We observed a substantial reduction in
time (22%) and in the number of configurations (45%) for configurable Java
programs. In a case study on a large real-world configurable system (GCC),
EvoSPLat reduced 35% of the running time. Comparing EvoSPLat with sampling
techniques, 2-wise was the most efficient technique, but it missed two bugs
whereas EvoSPLat detected all bugs four times faster than 6-wise, on average.Comment: 14 page
- …