Code-coverage guided prioritized test generation

Li, J.J.; Yee, Howell

doi:10.1109/cmpsac.2004.1342705

Cited by 5 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, Li et al [53] propose a method for guiding users through test case generation. An experiment of this method showed a good result regarding test effort reduction.…”

Section: Category Automationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reducing test effort: A systematic mapping study on existing approaches

Elberzhager

Rosbach

Münch³

et al. 2012

Information and Software Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…For example, Li et al [53] propose a method for guiding users through test case generation. An experiment of this method showed a good result regarding test effort reduction.…”

Section: Category Automationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reducing test effort: A systematic mapping study on existing approaches

Elberzhager

Rosbach

Münch³

et al. 2012

Information and Software Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Another necessary improvement to the method of [7] is test data generation. The original test generation method generates one data value set so that the intended program point can be reached at least once after the value set is passed as parameters into the test execution.…”

Section: B Automatic Testermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Repeat this process of test generation and execution until defects are detected by at least one failed test or all high-priority code is fully covered by test cases. The method given in [7] generates test cases to cover highest priority code, where priority means higher code coverage. We replace its priority calculation, based on code coverage potential of each program line, with our dpv calculation that indicates failure potential of each line.…”

Section: B Automatic Testermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The second defect (BB 4 ) was assigned a dpv value of 2 based on another heuristic that the issue of having an out-of-range return value can cause major problems, but not severe ones. Once the initial dpv value of each DFG node is decided based on heuristics, we use the method in [7] to generate a test of which the execution can reach the highlighted highestpriority code. Once a test is generated, it is executed right away and the dpv value of each DFG node is updated according to test results.…”

Section: B Automatic Testermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The tester generates and runs tests to cover the erroneous program points that are detected by static checkers. Code-based test generation and execution were covered in [7]. The tester confirms a subset of defects that have triggered failed tests and sends the confirmed defects to developers for fixing ("Confirmed Defects").…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

SoftWare IMmunization (SWIM) - A Combination of Static Analysis and Automatic Testing

Palframan

Landwehr

2011

2011 IEEE 35th Annual Computer Software and Applications Conference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Static program analysis uses many checkers to discover a very large number of programming issues, but with a high false alarm rate. With the aid of dynamic automatic testing, the actual severe defects can be confirmed by failures of test cases. After defects are fixed, similar types of defects tend to reoccur again. In this paper, we propose a SoftWare IMmunization (SWIM) method to combine static analysis and automatic testing results for detecting severe defects and preventing similar defects from reoccurring, i.e. to have the software immunized from the same type of defects. Three industrial trials of the technology demonstrated the feasibility and defect detection accuracy of the SWIM technology.

show abstract

Using testing trace for automatic user categorization

Weiss

2009

2009 ICSE Workshop on Automation of Software Test

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Testing has always been an indispensable part of software development. With the increasing amount of testing, the volume of data and information generated from testing grows substantially. The question arises on how to take advantage of the testing data, besides traditional coverage and debugging. In this paper, we propose an approach of using test trace data of a software application to its run-time user categorization. It collects test execution trace of programs studied by the software tool, and derives internal metrics of different categories from the trace information. During run time, we look at the user's artifacts as well as the user's behavior to categorize them into predetermined groups and serve them accordingly. Our work in-progress is to apply this method to a software product line, PolyFlow, including a web service that generates, runs, and analyzes test cases of programs under study. One benefit of our method is that it does not require storage of user profiles.

show abstract

Code-coverage guided prioritized test generation

Cited by 5 publications

References 6 publications

Reducing test effort: A systematic mapping study on existing approaches

Reducing test effort: A systematic mapping study on existing approaches

SoftWare IMmunization (SWIM) - A Combination of Static Analysis and Automatic Testing

Using testing trace for automatic user categorization

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About