Cost and Coverage Metrics for Measuring the Effectiveness of Test Case Prioritization Techniques

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Askarunisa, MS. A.
Data de Publicação: 2010
Outros Autores: Shanmugapriya, MS. L., Ramaraj, DR. N.
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: INFOCOMP: Jornal de Ciência da Computação
Texto Completo: https://infocomp.dcc.ufla.br/index.php/infocomp/article/view/289
Resumo: Regression testing is an important and also a very expensive activity in the software life cycle. To reduce the cost of regression testing, test cases are prioritized. One goal of test case prioritization technique is to increase a test suite’s rate of fault detection and to reduce the cost of regression testing. In his paper G. Rothermel [9] has provided a metric, Average Percentage of Fault Detected (APFD), for measuring rate of fault detection during prioritization. This metric assumes that all test cases and fault costs are uniform. In practice, test case and fault costs may vary, and in such cases the previous APFD metric can be unsatisfactory. This paper presents a metric for assessing the rate of fault detection of prioritized test cases, APFDc, that incorporates varying test cases and fault costs. We have also calculated other new metrics like Average Percentage of Statement Coverage (APSC), Average Percentage of Branch Coverage (APBC),Average Percentage of Loop Coverage (APLC) and Average Percentage of Condition Coverage (APCC) based on the coverage criterion for the various prioritization techniques performed. Test cases are executed using JUnit tool. Code cover tool is used to find code coverage information. Test case prioritization is performed based on coverage and cost information. By injecting mutation faults effectiveness of prioritization is measured. Finally, we have implemented all the metrics considering a few standard java programs.
id UFLA-5_eb37a8f86fd5cf2dd9e7e6e0e15a06d9
oai_identifier_str oai:infocomp.dcc.ufla.br:article/289
network_acronym_str UFLA-5
network_name_str INFOCOMP: Jornal de Ciência da Computação
repository_id_str
spelling Cost and Coverage Metrics for Measuring the Effectiveness of Test Case Prioritization TechniquesRegression Testingcode coveragetest case prioritizationmutation faultsAverage percent- age of Fault Detection (APFD)Average percentage of Fault Detection with cost (APFDc).Regression testing is an important and also a very expensive activity in the software life cycle. To reduce the cost of regression testing, test cases are prioritized. One goal of test case prioritization technique is to increase a test suite’s rate of fault detection and to reduce the cost of regression testing. In his paper G. Rothermel [9] has provided a metric, Average Percentage of Fault Detected (APFD), for measuring rate of fault detection during prioritization. This metric assumes that all test cases and fault costs are uniform. In practice, test case and fault costs may vary, and in such cases the previous APFD metric can be unsatisfactory. This paper presents a metric for assessing the rate of fault detection of prioritized test cases, APFDc, that incorporates varying test cases and fault costs. We have also calculated other new metrics like Average Percentage of Statement Coverage (APSC), Average Percentage of Branch Coverage (APBC),Average Percentage of Loop Coverage (APLC) and Average Percentage of Condition Coverage (APCC) based on the coverage criterion for the various prioritization techniques performed. Test cases are executed using JUnit tool. Code cover tool is used to find code coverage information. Test case prioritization is performed based on coverage and cost information. By injecting mutation faults effectiveness of prioritization is measured. Finally, we have implemented all the metrics considering a few standard java programs.Editora da UFLA2010-03-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://infocomp.dcc.ufla.br/index.php/infocomp/article/view/289INFOCOMP Journal of Computer Science; Vol. 9 No. 1 (2010): March, 2010; 43-521982-33631807-4545reponame:INFOCOMP: Jornal de Ciência da Computaçãoinstname:Universidade Federal de Lavras (UFLA)instacron:UFLAenghttps://infocomp.dcc.ufla.br/index.php/infocomp/article/view/289/274Copyright (c) 2016 INFOCOMP Journal of Computer Scienceinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessAskarunisa, MS. A.Shanmugapriya, MS. L.Ramaraj, DR. N.2014-12-09T13:05:17Zoai:infocomp.dcc.ufla.br:article/289Revistahttps://infocomp.dcc.ufla.br/index.php/infocompPUBhttps://infocomp.dcc.ufla.br/index.php/infocomp/oaiinfocomp@dcc.ufla.br||apfreire@dcc.ufla.br1982-33631807-4545opendoar:2024-05-21T19:54:29.994187INFOCOMP: Jornal de Ciência da Computação - Universidade Federal de Lavras (UFLA)true
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Cost and Coverage Metrics for Measuring the Effectiveness of Test Case Prioritization Techniques
title Cost and Coverage Metrics for Measuring the Effectiveness of Test Case Prioritization Techniques
spellingShingle Cost and Coverage Metrics for Measuring the Effectiveness of Test Case Prioritization Techniques
Askarunisa, MS. A.
Regression Testing
code coverage
test case prioritization
mutation faults
Average percent- age of Fault Detection (APFD)
Average percentage of Fault Detection with cost (APFDc).
title_short Cost and Coverage Metrics for Measuring the Effectiveness of Test Case Prioritization Techniques
title_full Cost and Coverage Metrics for Measuring the Effectiveness of Test Case Prioritization Techniques
title_fullStr Cost and Coverage Metrics for Measuring the Effectiveness of Test Case Prioritization Techniques
title_full_unstemmed Cost and Coverage Metrics for Measuring the Effectiveness of Test Case Prioritization Techniques
title_sort Cost and Coverage Metrics for Measuring the Effectiveness of Test Case Prioritization Techniques
author Askarunisa, MS. A.
author_facet Askarunisa, MS. A.
Shanmugapriya, MS. L.
Ramaraj, DR. N.
author_role author
author2 Shanmugapriya, MS. L.
Ramaraj, DR. N.
author2_role author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Askarunisa, MS. A.
Shanmugapriya, MS. L.
Ramaraj, DR. N.
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Regression Testing
code coverage
test case prioritization
mutation faults
Average percent- age of Fault Detection (APFD)
Average percentage of Fault Detection with cost (APFDc).
topic Regression Testing
code coverage
test case prioritization
mutation faults
Average percent- age of Fault Detection (APFD)
Average percentage of Fault Detection with cost (APFDc).
description Regression testing is an important and also a very expensive activity in the software life cycle. To reduce the cost of regression testing, test cases are prioritized. One goal of test case prioritization technique is to increase a test suite’s rate of fault detection and to reduce the cost of regression testing. In his paper G. Rothermel [9] has provided a metric, Average Percentage of Fault Detected (APFD), for measuring rate of fault detection during prioritization. This metric assumes that all test cases and fault costs are uniform. In practice, test case and fault costs may vary, and in such cases the previous APFD metric can be unsatisfactory. This paper presents a metric for assessing the rate of fault detection of prioritized test cases, APFDc, that incorporates varying test cases and fault costs. We have also calculated other new metrics like Average Percentage of Statement Coverage (APSC), Average Percentage of Branch Coverage (APBC),Average Percentage of Loop Coverage (APLC) and Average Percentage of Condition Coverage (APCC) based on the coverage criterion for the various prioritization techniques performed. Test cases are executed using JUnit tool. Code cover tool is used to find code coverage information. Test case prioritization is performed based on coverage and cost information. By injecting mutation faults effectiveness of prioritization is measured. Finally, we have implemented all the metrics considering a few standard java programs.
publishDate 2010
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2010-03-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://infocomp.dcc.ufla.br/index.php/infocomp/article/view/289
url https://infocomp.dcc.ufla.br/index.php/infocomp/article/view/289
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://infocomp.dcc.ufla.br/index.php/infocomp/article/view/289/274
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2016 INFOCOMP Journal of Computer Science
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2016 INFOCOMP Journal of Computer Science
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Editora da UFLA
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Editora da UFLA
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv INFOCOMP Journal of Computer Science; Vol. 9 No. 1 (2010): March, 2010; 43-52
1982-3363
1807-4545
reponame:INFOCOMP: Jornal de Ciência da Computação
instname:Universidade Federal de Lavras (UFLA)
instacron:UFLA
instname_str Universidade Federal de Lavras (UFLA)
instacron_str UFLA
institution UFLA
reponame_str INFOCOMP: Jornal de Ciência da Computação
collection INFOCOMP: Jornal de Ciência da Computação
repository.name.fl_str_mv INFOCOMP: Jornal de Ciência da Computação - Universidade Federal de Lavras (UFLA)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv infocomp@dcc.ufla.br||apfreire@dcc.ufla.br
_version_ 1825947745250181120