Untitled

Polo, Macario; Piattini, Mario; García-Rodríguez, Ignacio

doi:10.1002/stvr.v19:2

Cited by 27 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 84 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Construction Risk: To control the experimentation process and reduce the risk of an analysis based on incorrect data in systems shown in Table 1, data collection process and the effective usage of the technique based on the faults were validated in simpler systems used in previous experiments (Polo et al 2009). Ayewah et al (2007a) examined different types of warnings reported by FindBugs classifying them into false positives, trivial bugs and serious bugs.…”

Section: Lessons Learned and Threats To Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Correlating automatic static analysis and mutation testing: towards incremental strategies

Araujo

Delamaro

Maldonado

et al. 2016

J Softw Eng Res Dev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Traditionally, mutation testing is used as test set generation and/or test evaluation criteria once it is considered a good fault model. This paper uses mutation testing for evaluating an automated static analyzer. Since static analyzers, in general, report a substantial number of false positive warnings, the intention of this study is to define a prioritization approach of static warnings based on their correspondence with mutations. On the other hand, knowing that Mutation Test has a high application cost, another possibility is to try to identify mutations of some specific mutation operators, which an automatic static analyzer is not adequate to detect. Therefore, this information can be used to prioritize the order of incrementally applying mutation operators considering, firstly, those with no correspondence with static warnings. In both cases, contributing to the establishment of incremental strategies on using automatic static analysis or mutation testing or even a combination of them. Methods: We used mutation operators as a fault model to evaluate the direct correspondence between mutations and static warnings. The main advantage of using mutation operators is that they generate a large number of programs containing faults of different types, which can be used to decide the ones most probable to be detected by static analyzers. Results: We provide evidences on the correspondence between mutations and some types of static warnings. The results obtained for a set of 19 open-source programs indicate that: 1) static warnings may be prioritized based on their correspondence level with mutations; 2) specific set of mutation operators and their mutations may be prioritized based on their correspondence level with warnings. Conclusion: It is possible to provide an incremental testing strategy aiming at reducing the cost of both static analysis and mutation testing using the correspondence information between these activities/artifacts.

show abstract

Section: Lessons Learned and Threats To Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Correlating automatic static analysis and mutation testing: towards incremental strategies

Araujo

Delamaro

Maldonado

et al. 2016

J Softw Eng Res Dev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1). While most research on mutation analysis has focused on first-order mutants, recent studies claim that higher-order mutants are less likely to be equivalent mutants [36,49,52,61] and that higher-order mutants can reduce test effort [21,23,65]. In Section 2, we will discuss a specific use case with a motivating example.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficiently finding higher-order mutants

Wong

Meinicke

Chen

et al. 2020

Proceedings of the 28th ACM Joint Meeting on European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Softw

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…To that end, Jia and Harman [23] distinguish first-order mutants, consisting of a single change, from higher-order mutants that combine multiple changes. While most research on mutation analysis has focused on first-order mutants, higher-order mutation is promising: For example, recent studies claim that higher-order mutants are less likely to be equivalent mutants [35,50,53,62], and that higher-order mutants can reduce test effort [21,23,68]. In Section 2, we discuss a specific use case of higher-order mutants with a motivating example.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficiently Finding Higher-Order Mutants

Wong¹,

Meinicke²,

Chen³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Higher-order mutation has the potential for improving major drawbacks of traditional first-order mutation, such as by simulating more realistic faults or improving test optimization techniques. Despite interest in studying promising higher-order mutants, such mutants are difficult to find due to the exponential search space of mutation combinations. State-of-the-art approaches rely on genetic search, which is often incomplete and expensive due to its stochastic nature. First, we propose a novel way of finding a complete set of higherorder mutants by using variational execution, a technique that can, in many cases, explore large search spaces completely and often efficiently. Second, we use the identified complete set of higher-order mutants to study their characteristics. Finally, we use the identified characteristics to design and evaluate a new search strategy, independent of variational execution, that is highly effective at finding higher-order mutants even in large code bases.

show abstract

Untitled

Cited by 27 publications

References 84 publications

Correlating automatic static analysis and mutation testing: towards incremental strategies

Correlating automatic static analysis and mutation testing: towards incremental strategies

Efficiently finding higher-order mutants

Efficiently Finding Higher-Order Mutants

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About