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

Search-based crash reproduction using behavioural model seeding

Search-based crash reproduction approaches assist developers during debugging by generating a test case which reproduces a crash given its stack trace. One of the fundamental steps of this approach is creating objects needed to trigger the crash. One way to overcome this limitation is seeding: using information about the application during the search process. With seeding, the existing usages of classes can be used in the search process to produce realistic sequences of method calls which create the required objects. In this study, we introduce behavioral model seeding: a new seeding method which learns class usages from both the system under test and existing test cases. Learned usages are then synthesized in a behavioral model (state machine). Then, this model serves to guide the evolutionary process. To assess behavioral model-seeding, we evaluate it against test-seeding (the state-of-the-art technique for seeding realistic objects) and no-seeding (without seeding any class usage). For this evaluation, we use a benchmark of 124 hard-to-reproduce crashes stemming from six open-source projects. Our results indicate that behavioral model-seeding outperforms both test seeding and no-seeding by a minimum of 6% without any notable negative impact on efficiency

Potential Errors and Test Assessment in Software Product Line Engineering

Software product lines (SPL) are a method for the development of variant-rich software systems. Compared to non-variable systems, testing SPLs is extensive due to an increasingly amount of possible products. Different approaches exist for testing SPLs, but there is less research for assessing the quality of these tests by means of error detection capability. Such test assessment is based on error injection into correct version of the system under test. However to our knowledge, potential errors in SPL engineering have never been systematically identified before. This article presents an overview over existing paradigms for specifying software product lines and the errors that can occur during the respective specification processes. For assessment of test quality, we leverage mutation testing techniques to SPL engineering and implement the identified errors as mutation operators. This allows us to run existing tests against defective products for the purpose of test assessment. From the results, we draw conclusions about the error-proneness of the surveyed SPL design paradigms and how quality of SPL tests can be improved.Comment: In Proceedings MBT 2015, arXiv:1504.0192

Constraint-based reachability

Iterative imperative programs can be considered as infinite-state systems computing over possibly unbounded domains. Studying reachability in these systems is challenging as it requires to deal with an infinite number of states with standard backward or forward exploration strategies. An approach that we call Constraint-based reachability, is proposed to address reachability problems by exploring program states using a constraint model of the whole program. The keypoint of the approach is to interpret imperative constructions such as conditionals, loops, array and memory manipulations with the fundamental notion of constraint over a computational domain. By combining constraint filtering and abstraction techniques, Constraint-based reachability is able to solve reachability problems which are usually outside the scope of backward or forward exploration strategies. This paper proposes an interpretation of classical filtering consistencies used in Constraint Programming as abstract domain computations, and shows how this approach can be used to produce a constraint solver that efficiently generates solutions for reachability problems that are unsolvable by other approaches.Comment: In Proceedings Infinity 2012, arXiv:1302.310

JUGE: An Infrastructure for Benchmarking Java Unit Test Generators

Researchers and practitioners have designed and implemented various automated test case generators to support effective software testing. Such generators exist for various languages (e.g., Java, C#, or Python) and for various platforms (e.g., desktop, web, or mobile applications). Such generators exhibit varying effectiveness and efficiency, depending on the testing goals they aim to satisfy (e.g., unit-testing of libraries vs. system-testing of entire applications) and the underlying techniques they implement. In this context, practitioners need to be able to compare different generators to identify the most suited one for their requirements, while researchers seek to identify future research directions. This can be achieved through the systematic execution of large-scale evaluations of different generators. However, the execution of such empirical evaluations is not trivial and requires a substantial effort to collect benchmarks, setup the evaluation infrastructure, and collect and analyse the results. In this paper, we present our JUnit Generation benchmarking infrastructure (JUGE) supporting generators (e.g., search-based, random-based, symbolic execution, etc.) seeking to automate the production of unit tests for various purposes (e.g., validation, regression testing, fault localization, etc.). The primary goal is to reduce the overall effort, ease the comparison of several generators, and enhance the knowledge transfer between academia and industry by standardizing the evaluation and comparison process. Since 2013, eight editions of a unit testing tool competition, co-located with the Search-Based Software Testing Workshop, have taken place and used and updated JUGE. As a result, an increasing amount of tools (over ten) from both academia and industry have been evaluated on JUGE, matured over the years, and allowed the identification of future research directions