在基于搜索的软件测试中,如何规范分支距离很重要

Andrea Arcuri
{"title":"在基于搜索的软件测试中,如何规范分支距离很重要","authors":"Andrea Arcuri","doi":"10.1109/ICST.2010.17","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The use of search algorithms for test data generation has seen many successful results. For structural criteria such as branch coverage, heuristics have been designed to help the search. The most common heuristic is the use of approach level (usually represented with an integer) to reward test cases whose executions get close (in the control flow graph)to the target branch. To solve the constraints of the predicates in the control flow graph, the branch distance is commonly employed. These two measures are linearly combined. Because the approach level is more important, the branch distance is normalised, often in the range [0,1]. In this paper, we analyse different types of normalising functions. We found out that the one that is usually employed in the literature has several flaws. We hence propose a different normalizing function that is very simple and that does not suffer of these limitations. We carried out empirical and analytical analyses to compare these two functions. In particular, we studied their effect on two commonly used search algorithms, namely Simulated Annealing and Genetic Algorithms.","PeriodicalId":192678,"journal":{"name":"2010 Third International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation","volume":"51 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"82","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"It Does Matter How You Normalise the Branch Distance in Search Based Software Testing\",\"authors\":\"Andrea Arcuri\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/ICST.2010.17\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The use of search algorithms for test data generation has seen many successful results. For structural criteria such as branch coverage, heuristics have been designed to help the search. The most common heuristic is the use of approach level (usually represented with an integer) to reward test cases whose executions get close (in the control flow graph)to the target branch. To solve the constraints of the predicates in the control flow graph, the branch distance is commonly employed. These two measures are linearly combined. Because the approach level is more important, the branch distance is normalised, often in the range [0,1]. In this paper, we analyse different types of normalising functions. We found out that the one that is usually employed in the literature has several flaws. We hence propose a different normalizing function that is very simple and that does not suffer of these limitations. We carried out empirical and analytical analyses to compare these two functions. In particular, we studied their effect on two commonly used search algorithms, namely Simulated Annealing and Genetic Algorithms.\",\"PeriodicalId\":192678,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2010 Third International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation\",\"volume\":\"51 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-04-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"82\",\"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.2010.17\",\"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.2010.17","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 82

摘要

使用搜索算法生成测试数据已经看到了许多成功的结果。对于结构标准,如分支覆盖率,启发式被设计用来帮助搜索。最常见的启发式方法是使用方法级别(通常用整数表示)来奖励执行接近(在控制流图中)目标分支的测试用例。为了解决控制流图中谓词的约束问题,通常采用分支距离。这两个度量是线性组合的。由于接近水平更重要,分支距离被归一化,通常在[0,1]范围内。在本文中,我们分析了不同类型的归一化函数。我们发现,文献中通常使用的方法有几个缺陷。因此,我们提出了一种不同的归一化函数,它非常简单,并且不会受到这些限制。我们对这两个函数进行了实证分析和分析比较。特别地,我们研究了它们对两种常用的搜索算法,即模拟退火算法和遗传算法的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
It Does Matter How You Normalise the Branch Distance in Search Based Software Testing
The use of search algorithms for test data generation has seen many successful results. For structural criteria such as branch coverage, heuristics have been designed to help the search. The most common heuristic is the use of approach level (usually represented with an integer) to reward test cases whose executions get close (in the control flow graph)to the target branch. To solve the constraints of the predicates in the control flow graph, the branch distance is commonly employed. These two measures are linearly combined. Because the approach level is more important, the branch distance is normalised, often in the range [0,1]. In this paper, we analyse different types of normalising functions. We found out that the one that is usually employed in the literature has several flaws. We hence propose a different normalizing function that is very simple and that does not suffer of these limitations. We carried out empirical and analytical analyses to compare these two functions. In particular, we studied their effect on two commonly used search algorithms, namely Simulated Annealing and Genetic Algorithms.
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