通过设计实验评估GUI测试技术

C. Bertolini, A. Mota, E. Aranha, Cristiano Ferraz
{"title":"通过设计实验评估GUI测试技术","authors":"C. Bertolini, A. Mota, E. Aranha, Cristiano Ferraz","doi":"10.1109/ICST.2010.41","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Industry uses different testing techniques for test case generation and execution. But in general no systematic evaluation is performed to identify which technique is better (for instance, to find bugs faster). This paper presents a statistical assessment of two GUI testing techniques, BxT and DH, which are used on Motorola phone applications. These techniques test applications by pressing certain phone keys, from certain screens and during some amount of time. We consider three exploration parameters for each technique in our design and analysis of experiments: Driven determines whether a test case always starts from a single initial state (screen) or set of initial states; KeyProb associates an occurrence probability for SizeTC refers to the number of steps a test can have (a fourth parameter is the Technique itself). As conclusions, we show that BxT is better than DH and the SizeTC and the Technique parameters and the combination Driven*SizeTC have significant effects on the time to find a bug.","PeriodicalId":192678,"journal":{"name":"2010 Third International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation","volume":"35 2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"17","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"GUI Testing Techniques Evaluation by Designed Experiments\",\"authors\":\"C. Bertolini, A. Mota, E. Aranha, Cristiano Ferraz\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/ICST.2010.41\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Industry uses different testing techniques for test case generation and execution. But in general no systematic evaluation is performed to identify which technique is better (for instance, to find bugs faster). This paper presents a statistical assessment of two GUI testing techniques, BxT and DH, which are used on Motorola phone applications. These techniques test applications by pressing certain phone keys, from certain screens and during some amount of time. We consider three exploration parameters for each technique in our design and analysis of experiments: Driven determines whether a test case always starts from a single initial state (screen) or set of initial states; KeyProb associates an occurrence probability for SizeTC refers to the number of steps a test can have (a fourth parameter is the Technique itself). As conclusions, we show that BxT is better than DH and the SizeTC and the Technique parameters and the combination Driven*SizeTC have significant effects on the time to find a bug.\",\"PeriodicalId\":192678,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2010 Third International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation\",\"volume\":\"35 2 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-04-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"17\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2010 Third International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICST.2010.41\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2010 Third International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICST.2010.41","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

摘要

工业使用不同的测试技术来生成和执行测试用例。但是一般来说,没有进行系统的评估来确定哪种技术更好(例如,更快地找到bug)。本文对摩托罗拉手机应用中使用的两种GUI测试技术BxT和DH进行了统计评估。这些技术通过在特定的屏幕上按特定的电话键,在特定的时间内测试应用程序。在我们的设计和实验分析中,我们考虑了每种技术的三个探索参数:驱动决定测试用例是否总是从单个初始状态(屏幕)或一组初始状态开始;KeyProb关联一个发生概率,SizeTC指的是一个测试可以拥有的步骤数(第四个参数是技术本身)。作为结论,我们发现BxT优于DH和SizeTC,技术参数和组合Driven*SizeTC对发现bug的时间有显著影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
GUI Testing Techniques Evaluation by Designed Experiments
Industry uses different testing techniques for test case generation and execution. But in general no systematic evaluation is performed to identify which technique is better (for instance, to find bugs faster). This paper presents a statistical assessment of two GUI testing techniques, BxT and DH, which are used on Motorola phone applications. These techniques test applications by pressing certain phone keys, from certain screens and during some amount of time. We consider three exploration parameters for each technique in our design and analysis of experiments: Driven determines whether a test case always starts from a single initial state (screen) or set of initial states; KeyProb associates an occurrence probability for SizeTC refers to the number of steps a test can have (a fourth parameter is the Technique itself). As conclusions, we show that BxT is better than DH and the SizeTC and the Technique parameters and the combination Driven*SizeTC have significant effects on the time to find a bug.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信