Test diversity

Information and Software Technology

Volumn 48, Issue 11, 2006, Pages 1083-1094

  Nikolik, Borislav ^a  

^a Vidak Quality   (United States)

Author keywords

Conditional diversity; Data diversity; Diversity matrix; Experimentation; Linear independence; Orthogonality; Standard deviation; Testing tools; Theory; Verification

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER PROGRAMMING; COMPUTER SOFTWARE; DATA FLOW ANALYSIS; ERROR DETECTION; JAVA PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE; PROGRAMMING THEORY;

CONDITIONAL DIVERSITY; DATA DIVERSITY; DIVERSITY MATRIX; EXPERIMENTATION; LINEAR INDEPENDENCE; ORTHOGONALITY; STANDARD DEVIATION; TESTING TOOLS; VERIFICATION;

SOFTWARE ENGINEERING;

EID: 33749267973     PISSN: 09505849     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.infsof.2006.02.001     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Avizienis A. The n-version approach to fault-tolerant software. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 11 (1985) 1491-1501
2. Baase S. Computer Algorithms. second ed. (1988), Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA 16
3. B. Liblit, A. Aiken, A. Zheng, M. Jordan, Bug isolation via remote program slicing, in: PLDI 2003, 2003, pp. 141-154.
4. Davis M.D., and Weyuker E.J. A formal notion of program-based test data adequacy. Inform. Control 56 (1983) 52-71
5. DeMillo R., Lipton R., and Sayward F. Hints on test data selection: help for the practicing programmer. Computer 11 (1978) 34-43
6. Thevenod Fosse, Waeselynck Helene, Software statistical testing based on structural and functional coverage, in: 11th International Quality Week, May San Francisco, CA, 2003, pp. 4-12.
7. Frankl P., and Weyuker E. A formal analysis of the fault-detecting ability of testing methods. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 19 (1993) 202-213
8. Anup K. Ghosh, Tom O'Connor, Gary McGraw, An automated approach for identifying potential vulnerabilities in software, in: Proceedings of the 11th Annual Network and Distributed Systems Security Symposium, 2004, p. 159-169.
9. Goel A.L., and Okumoto K. Time dependent error detection rate model for software and other performance measures. IEEE Trans. Reliab. R-28 (1979) 206-211
10. D. Hamlet, B. Gifford, B. Nikolik, Exploring dataflow testing of arrays, in: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Software Engineering, 1993, pp. 118-129.
11. Hamlet D., and Taylor R. Partition testing does not inspire confidence. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 16 (1990) 1402-1411
12. Hamlet R.G. Testing programs with the aid of a compiler. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 3 (1977) 279-290 SE-3
13. Hennesey J.L., and Patterson D.A. Computer Architecture. A Quantitative Approach (1990), Morgan Kaufmann, Los Altos, CA 251-343
14. Flowers B.H. An Introduction to Numerical Methods in C++ (2000), Oxford University Press, Oxford
15. J. Bowring, A. Orso, M.J. Harrold, Monitoring deployed software using software tomography, in: ACM SIGPLAN-SIGSOFT PASTE 2002, 2002, pp. 2-9.
16. Laski J., and Korel B. A data flow oriented program testing strategy. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. (1983) 347-354 SE-9
17. Leveson N.G. Safeware System Safety and Computers (1995), Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA
18. De Millo R.A., Lipton R.J., and Sayward F.G. Hints on test data selection: help for the practicing programmer. IEEE Comput. (1978)
19. M. Harder, J. Mellen, M. Ernst, Improving test suites via operational abstraction, in: ICSE 2003, 2003, pp. 60-71.
20. Nikolik B. Constraint preservation through loops. Inform. Process. Lett. 55 (1995) 143-148
21. B. Nikolik, Convergence debugging, in: AADEBUG, 2005, pp. 89-98.
22. Nikolik B. Oscillating test suites. Inform. Process. Lett. (2006)
23. B. Nikolik, The π measure, in: IEEE METRICS 2004, 2004.
24. O. Ruwase, M.S. Lam, A practical dynamic buffer overflow detector. , 2002.
25. Rapps S., and Weyuker E.J. Selecting software test data using data flow information. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. (1985) 367-375 SE-11
26. Tsoukalas M.Z., Duran J.W., and Ntafos S.C. On some reliability estimation problems in random and partition testing. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 19 (1993) 687-697
27. Weiser M.D., Gannon J.D., and McMullin P.R. Comparison of structural test coverage metrics. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. (1985) 367-375 SE-11
28. Weiss S.N. What to compare when comparing test data adequacy criteria. Softw. Eng. Notes 14 (1989) 42-49
29. E.J. Weyuker, Can we measure software testing effectiveness, in: Proceedings of the IEEE-CS International Software Metrics Symposium, 1993, pp. 100-107.
30. E.J. Weyuker, S.N. Weiss, R.G. Hamlet, Comparison of program testing strategies, in: Symposium on Testing, Analysis, and Verification (TAV4), Victoria, BC, 1991, pp. 1-10.
31. Wolfe M. Optimizing Supercompilers for Supercomputers (1989), MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
32. W. Dickinson, D. Leon, A. Podgurski, Finding failures by cluster analysis of execution profiles, in: ICSE 2001, 2001, pp. 339-348.
33. T.Y. Chen, F.C. Kuo, R.G. Merkel, S.P. Ng, Mirror adaptive random testing, in: Third International Conference on Quality Software, November Dallas TX, 1998.