4,373 research outputs found

    Empirical Evaluation of Mutation-based Test Prioritization Techniques

    Full text link
    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

    Full text link
    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
    • …
    corecore