extended-abstract

Directed test suite augmentation

Author:

Zhihong XuAuthors Info & Claims

ICSE '11: Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Software Engineering

Pages 1110 - 1113

https://doi.org/10.1145/1985793.1986008

Published: 21 May 2011 Publication History

Abstract

Test suite augmentation techniques are used in regression testing to identify code elements affected by changes and to generate test cases to cover those elements. Whereas methods and techniques to find affected elements have been extensively researched in regression testing, how to generate new test cases to cover these elements cost-effectively has rarely been studied. It is known that generating test cases is very expensive, so we want to focus on this second step. We believe that reusing existing test cases will help us achieve this task. This research intends to provide a framework for test suite augmentation techniques that will reuse existing test cases to automatically generate new test cases to cover as many affected elements as possible cost-effectively.

References

[1]

T. Apiwattanapong, R. Santelices, P. K. Chittimalli, A. Orso, and M. J. Harrold. Matrix: Maintenance-oriented testing requirements identifier and examiner. In Test.: Acad. Ind. Conf. Pract. Res. Techn., pages 137--146, Aug. 2006.

Digital Library

[2]

A. Baresel, D. Binkley, M. Harman, and B. Korel. Evolutionary testing in the presence of loop-assigned flags: a testability transformation approach. In Proc. Int'l. Symp. Softw. Test. Anal., July 2004.

Digital Library

[3]

S. Bohner and R. Arnold. Software Change Impact Analysis. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA, 1996.

Digital Library

[4]

C. Cadar, V. Ganesh, P. M. Pawlowski, D. L. Dill, and D. R. Engler. Exe: Automatically generating inputs of death. In Proc. Conf. Comp. Comm. Sec., pages 322--335, Oct 2006.

Digital Library

[5]

T. Y. Chen and R. Merkel. Quasi-random testing. IEEE Trans. Rel., 56(3):562--568, 2007.

[6]

L. Clarke. A system to generate test data and symbolically execute programs. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., 2(3):215--222, Sept. 1976.

Digital Library

[7]

E. Díaz, J. Tuya, R. Blanco, and J. Javier Dolado. A tabu search algorithm for structural software testing. Comp. Op. Res., 35(10):3052--3072, 2008.

Digital Library

[8]

S. Elbaum, A. Malishevsky, and G. Rothermel. Test case prioritization: A family of empirical studies. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., 28(2):159--182, 2002.

Digital Library

[9]

R. Ferguson and B. Korel. The chaining approach for software test data generation. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Meth., 5(1):63--86, Jan. 1996.

Digital Library

[10]

A. Gotlieb, B. Botella, and M. Reuher. Automatic test data generation using constraint solving techniques. In Proc. Int'l. Symp. Softw. Test. Anal., Mar. 1998.

Digital Library

[11]

B. Korel. Automated software test data generation. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., 16(8):870--897, Aug. 1990.

Digital Library

[12]

C. Michael, G. McGraw, and M. Shatz. Generating software test data by evolution. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., 27(12):1085--1110, Dec. 2001.

Digital Library

[13]

A. Orso, N. Shi, and M. J. Harrold. Scaling regression testing to large software systems. In Proc. Int'l. Symp. Found. Softw. Eng., Nov. 2004.

Digital Library

[14]

S. Person, M. B. Dwyer, S. Elbaum, and C. S. Păsăreanu. differential symbolic execution. In Proc. Int'l. Symp. Found. Softw. Eng., Nov. 2008.

Digital Library

[15]

D. Qi, A. Roychoudhury, and Z. Liang. Test generation to expose changes in evolving programs. In Proc. Int'l Conf. on Auto. Soft. Eng., 2010.

Digital Library

[16]

G. Rothermel and M. J. Harrold. Selecting tests and identifying test coverage requirements for modified software. In Proc. Int'l Symp. Softw. Test. Anal., 1994.

Digital Library

[17]

G. Rothermel and M. J. Harrold. A safe, efficient regression test selection technique. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Meth., 6(2):173--210, Apr. 1997.

Digital Library

[18]

R. Santelices, P. K. Chittimalli, T. Apiwattanapong, A. Orso, and M. J. Harrold. Test-suite augmentation for evolving software. In Proc. Int'l Conf. Auto. Softw. Eng., Sept. 2008.

Digital Library

[19]

K. Sen, D. Marinov, and G. Agha. CUTE: A concolic unit testing engine for C. In Proc. Int'l Symp. Found. Softw. Eng., pages 263--272, Sept. 2005.

Digital Library

[20]

W. Visser, C. Pasareanu, and S. Khurshid. Test input generation with Java Pathfinder. In Proc. Int'l Symp. Softw. Test. Anal., pages 97--107, July 2004.

Digital Library

[21]

Z. Xu, M. Cohen, and G. Rothermel. Factors affecting the use of genetic algorithms in test suite augmentation. In Gen. Evol. Comp. Conf, July 2010.

Digital Library

[22]

Z. Xu, Y. Kim, M. Kim, G. Rothermel, and M. Cohen. Directed test suite augmentation: Techniques and tradeoffs. In Proc. Int's Symp. Found.of Softw. Eng., Nov. 2010.

Digital Library

[23]

Z. Xu and G. Rothermel. Directed test suite augmentation. In Proc. Asia-Pacific Softw. Eng. Conf., Dec. 2009.

Digital Library

[24]

S. Yoo and M. Harman. Pareto efficient multi-objective test case selection. In Proc. Int'l. Conf. Softw. Test. Anal., pages 140--150, July 2007.

Digital Library

Cited By

Yi QYang G(2022)Feedback-Driven Incremental Symbolic Execution2022 IEEE 33rd International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering (ISSRE)10.1109/ISSRE55969.2022.00055(505-516)Online publication date: Oct-2022
https://doi.org/10.1109/ISSRE55969.2022.00055
Grano GTitov TPanichella SGall H(2019)Branch coverage prediction in automated testingJournal of Software: Evolution and Process10.1002/smr.215831:9Online publication date: 13-Oct-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1002/smr.2158
Grano GTitov TPanichella SGall H(2018)How high will it be? Using machine learning models to predict branch coverage in automated testing2018 IEEE Workshop on Machine Learning Techniques for Software Quality Evaluation (MaLTeSQuE)10.1109/MALTESQUE.2018.8368454(19-24)Online publication date: Mar-2018
https://doi.org/10.1109/MALTESQUE.2018.8368454
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Directed test suite augmentation
1. Software and its engineering
  1. Software creation and management
    1. Software verification and validation
      1. Software defect analysis
        Software testing and debugging

Recommendations

Directed test suite augmentation: techniques and tradeoffs
FSE '10: Proceedings of the eighteenth ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on Foundations of software engineering

Test suite augmentation techniques are used in regression testing to identify code elements affected by changes and to generate test cases to cover those elements. Our preliminary work suggests that several factors influence the cost and effectiveness ...
Directed test suite augmentation via exploiting program dependency
CSTVA 2014: Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Constraints in Software Testing, Verification, and Analysis

Regression testing is a practice to discover faults introduced in the program modification. However, the existing test suite is usually designed at an early stage of software development and is therefore insensitive to subsequent program changes. ...
Directed Test Suite Augmentation
APSEC '09: Proceedings of the 2009 16th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference

As software evolves, engineers use regression testing to evaluate its fitness for release. Such testing typically begins with existing test cases, and many techniques have been proposed for reusing these cost-effectively. After reusing test cases, ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

ICSE '11: Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Software Engineering

May 2011

1258 pages

ISBN:9781450304450

DOI:10.1145/1985793

General Chair:
Richard N. Taylor
UC Irvine, USA
,
Program Chairs:
Harald Gall
University of Zurich, Switzerland
,
Nenad Medvidović
University of Southern California, USA

Copyright © 2011 Copyright is held by the owner/author(s).

Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 21 May 2011

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Extended-abstract

Conference

ICSE11

Sponsor:

SIGSOFT

ICSE11: International Conference on Software Engineering

May 21 - 28, 2011

HI, Waikiki, Honolulu, USA

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 276 of 1,856 submissions, 15%

Upcoming Conference

ICSE 2025

2025 IEEE/ACM 46th International Conference on Software Engineering

April 26 - May 3, 2025

Ottawa , ON , Canada

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

5
Total Citations
View Citations
213
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)10
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

Reflects downloads up to 20 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Yi QYang G(2022)Feedback-Driven Incremental Symbolic Execution2022 IEEE 33rd International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering (ISSRE)10.1109/ISSRE55969.2022.00055(505-516)Online publication date: Oct-2022
https://doi.org/10.1109/ISSRE55969.2022.00055
Grano GTitov TPanichella SGall H(2019)Branch coverage prediction in automated testingJournal of Software: Evolution and Process10.1002/smr.215831:9Online publication date: 13-Oct-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1002/smr.2158
Grano GTitov TPanichella SGall H(2018)How high will it be? Using machine learning models to predict branch coverage in automated testing2018 IEEE Workshop on Machine Learning Techniques for Software Quality Evaluation (MaLTeSQuE)10.1109/MALTESQUE.2018.8368454(19-24)Online publication date: Mar-2018
https://doi.org/10.1109/MALTESQUE.2018.8368454
Wang HGuan XZheng QLiu TShen CYang ZGanesh VWilliams N(2014)Directed test suite augmentation via exploiting program dependencyProceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Constraints in Software Testing, Verification, and Analysis10.1145/2593735.2593736(1-6)Online publication date: 31-May-2014
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2593735.2593736
Böhme MOliveira BRoychoudhury AMeyer BBaresi LMezini M(2013)Regression tests to expose change interaction errorsProceedings of the 2013 9th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering10.1145/2491411.2491430(334-344)Online publication date: 18-Aug-2013
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2491411.2491430

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Table of Conten