Alternating GUI test generation and execution

Proceedings - Testing: Academic and Industrial Conference Practice and Research Techniques, TAIC PART 2008

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages 23-32

  Yuan, Xun ^a   Memon, Atif M ^a  

^a Institute of Advanced Computer Science   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPLEX FAILURES; EMPIRICAL STUDIES; EVENT SEQUENCES; GUI TESTING; GUI TESTS; INPUT EVENTS; NEW TECHNIQUES; STATE SPACES; TEST CASES; TIME INFORMATIONS;

GRAPHICAL USER INTERFACES;

EID: 57649187334     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/TAIC-PART.2008.10     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (17)

1. P. T. Alessandro Marchetto and F. Ricca. State-based testing of Ajax web applications. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Software Testing, Verification, and Valication, pages 121-130, April 9-11, 2008.
2. C. Boyapati, S. Khurshid. and D. Marinov. Korat: automated testing based on java predicates. In ISSTA '02, pages 123-133, 2002.
3. M. d'Amorim, C. Pacheco, T. Xie. D. Marinov. and M. D. Ernst. An empirical comparison of automated generation and classification techniques for object-oriented unit testing. In Proceedings of the 21 st IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, 2006.
4. M. B. Dwyer, V. Canrr, and L. Hines. Model checking graphical user interfaces using abstractions. In ESEC/FSE '97, pages 244-261, 1997.
5. C. D. Grosso. G. Antoniol, E. Merlo, and P. Galinier. Detecting buffer overflow via automatic test input data generation. Comput. Open Res., 35(10):3125-3143, 2008.
6. R. M. Hierons and H. Ural. Optimizing the length of checking sequences. IEEE Transactions on Computers, 55(5):618-629, 2006.
7. D. Hovemeyer and W. Pugh. Finding bugs is easy. SIGPLAN Not., 39(12):92-106, 2004.
8. W. Masri, A. Podgurski, and D. Leon. An empirical study of test case filtering techniques based on exercising information flows. IEEE Trans. on Soft. Eng., 33(7):454-477, 2007.
9. P. McMinn, M. Harman, D. Binkley, and P. Tonella. The species per path approach to search-based test data generation. In ISSTA '06, pages 13-24, 2006.
10. A. M. Memon. Automatically repairing event sequencebased GUI test suites for regression testing. ACM Trans. on Softw. Eng. and Method., 2008.
11. A. M. Memon, I. Banerjee, and A. Nagarajan. GUI ripping: Reverse engineering of graphical user interfaces for testing. In Proceedings of The 10th Working Conference on Reverse Engineering, November 2003.
12. A. M. Memon and Q. Xie. Studying the fault-detection effectiveness of GUI test cases for rapidly evolving software. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., 31(10):884-896, 2005.
13. W. Miller and D. L. Spooner. Automatic generation of floating-point test data. IEEE Trans. Software Eng., 2(3):223-226, 1976.
14. C. Pacheco, S. K. Lahiri. M. D. Ernst, and T. Ball. Feedbackdirected random test generation. In ICSE '07, pages 396-405, May 23-25, 2007.
15. A. Rountev, S. Kagan, and M. Gibas. Evaluating the imprecision of static analysis. In Workshop on Program analysis for software tools and eng., pages 14-16, 2004.
16. T. Xie and D. Notkin. Tool-assisted unit-test generation and selection based on operational abstractions. Autom. Softw. Eng., 13(3):345-371, 2006.
17. X. Yuan and A. M. Memon. Using GUI run-time state as feedback to generate test cases. In ICSE '07, pages 396-405. May 23-25, 2007.