Test case prioritization using relevant slices

Proceedings - International Computer Software and Applications Conference

Volumn 1, Issue , 2006, Pages 411-418

  Jeffrey, Dennis ^a   Gupta, Neelam ^a  

^a University of Arizona   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT LIFECYCLE; TEST CASE PRIORITIZATION;

LIFE CYCLE; SOFTWARE ENGINEERING;

COMPUTER SOFTWARE SELECTION AND EVALUATION;

EID: 34247543543     PISSN: 07303157     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/COMPSAC.2006.80     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (17)

1. H. Agrawal, J. R. Horgan, E. W. Krauser, and S. London. Incremental regression testing. IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance, pages 348-357, 1993.
2. S. Elbaum, A. G. Malishvesky, and G. Rothermel. Test case prioritization: A family of empirical studies. IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering, 28(2):159-182, February 2002.
3. T. Gyimolhy, A. Beszedes, and I. Forgacs. An efficient relevant slicing method for debugging. ACM/SIGSOFT Foundations of Software Engineering, pages 303-321, 1999.
4. R. Gupta, M. J. Harrold, and M. Soffa. An approach to regression testing using slicing. IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance, pages 299-308, 1992.
5. M. J. Harrold, R. Gupta, and M. L. Soffa. A methodology for controlling the size of a test suite. ACM Trans. on Software Engineering and Methodology, 2(3):270-285. July 1993.
6. M. J. Harrold and G. Rothermel. Aristotle: A system for research on and development, of program analysis based tools. Technical Report OSU-CISRC-3/97-TR17, Ohio State University, March 1997.
7. http://www.cse.uni.edu/~galileo/sir.
8. M. Hutchins, H. Foster, T. Goradia, and T. Ostrand. Experiments on the effectiveness of dataflow- and controlflowbased test adequacy criteria. IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering, pages 191-200, 1994.
9. J.-M. Kim and A. Porter. A history-based test prioritization technique for regression testing in resource constrained environments. IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering, pages 119-129, 2002.
10. B. Korel and J. Laski. Algorithmic software fault, localization. Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pages 246-252, 1991.
11. G. Rothermel and S. Elbaum. Putting your best tests forward. IEEE Software, 20(5):74-77, Aug./Sept. 2003.
12. G. Rothermel and M. J. Harrold. A safe, efficient regression test selection technique. ACM Trans. on Software Engineering and Methodology, pages 173-210, 1997.
13. G. Rothermel, M. J. Harrold, J. Ostrin, and C. Hong. An empirical study of the effects of minimization on the fault detection capabilities of test suites. IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance, pages 34-43, 1998.
14. G. Rothermel, R. H. Untch, C. Chu, and M. J. Harrold. Prioritizing test cases for regression testing. IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering, 27(10):929-948, Oct. 2001.
15. A. Srivastava and J. Thiagarajan. Effectively prioritizing tests in development environment. ACM/SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis, pages 97-106, 2002.
16. S. Tallam and N. Gupta. A concept analysis inspired greedy algorithm for test suite minimization. ACM SIGPLAN SIGSOFT Workshop on Program Analysis for Software Tools and Engineering, Sept. 2005.
17. W. E. Wong, J. R. Horgan, S. London, and A. P. Mathur. Effect of test set minimization on fault detection effectiveness. Software - Practice and Experience, 28(4):347-3 69, April 1998.