05 Fakultät Informatik, Elektrotechnik und Informationstechnik

Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://elib.uni-stuttgart.de/handle/11682/6

Browse

Filters

2016 - 20192

Settings

Publication Type: search.filters.UBSTyp.KonferenzbeitragInstitute: search.filters.UBSInstitut.Institut für SoftwaretechnologieInstitute: search.filters.UBSInstitut.Fakultätsübergreifend / Sonstige EinrichtungSubject: search.filters.subject.004Author: search.filters.author.Niedermayr, Rainer

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Will my tests tell me if I break this code?
    (2016) Niedermayr, Rainer; Juergens, Elmar; Wagner, Stefan
    Automated tests play an important role in software evolution because they can rapidly detect faults introduced during changes. In practice, code-coverage metrics are often used as criteria to evaluate the effectiveness of test suites with focus on regression faults. However, code coverage only expresses which portion of a system has been executed by tests, but not how effective the tests actually are in detecting regression faults. Our goal was to evaluate the validity of code coverage as a measure for test effectiveness. To do so, we conducted an empirical study in which we applied an extreme mutation testing approach to analyze the tests of open-source projects written in Java. We assessed the ratio of pseudo-tested methods (those tested in a way such that faults would not be detected) to all covered methods and judged their impact on the software project. The results show that the ratio of pseudo-tested methods is acceptable for unit tests but not for system tests (that execute large portions of the whole system). Therefore, we conclude that the coverage metric is only a valid effectiveness indicator for unit tests.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Is the stack distance between test case and method correlated with test effectiveness?
    (2019) Niedermayr, Rainer; Wagner, Stefan
    Mutation testing is a means to assess the effectiveness of a test suite and its outcome is considered more meaningful than code coverage metrics. However, despite several optimizations, mutation testing requires a significant computational effort and has not been widely adopted in industry. Therefore, we study in this paper whether test effectiveness can be approximated using a more light-weight approach. We hypothesize that a test case is more likely to detect faults in methods that are close to the test case on the call stack than in methods that the test case accesses indirectly through many other methods. Based on this hypothesis, we propose the minimal stack distance between test case and method as a new test measure, which expresses how close any test case comes to a given method, and study its correlation with test effectiveness. We conducted an empirical study with 21 open-source projects, which comprise in total 1.8 million LOC, and show that a correlation exists between stack distance and test effectiveness. The correlation reaches a strength up to 0.58. We further show that a classifier using the minimal stack distance along with additional easily computable measures can predict the mutation testing result of a method with 92.9% precision and 93.4% recall. Hence, such a classifier can be taken into consideration as a light-weight alternative to mutation testing or as a preceding, less costly step to that.