skip to main content
10.1145/225014.225018acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article
Free Access

Effect of test set minimization on fault detection effectiveness

Authors Info & Claims
Published:23 April 1995Publication History
First page image

References

  1. 1.T. A. Budd, "Mutation Analysis of Program Test Data, " PhD thesis, Yale University, New Haven, CT, May 1980. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. 2.V. Chvatal, "A greedy heuristic for the setcovering problem," Mathematics of Operations Research, 4(3), August 1979.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.L. A. Clarke, A. Podgurski, D. J. Richardson, and S. J. Zeil, '(A formal evaluation of data flow path selection criteria," IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering, 15(11):1318-1332, November 1989. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. 4.R. A. DeMillo and A.P. Mathur, "On the use of software artifacts to evaluate the effectiveness of mutation analysis for detecting errors in production software, " in Thirteenth Minnowbrook Workshop on Software Engineering, July 1990.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.P. G. Frankl and S. N. Weiss, "An experimental comparison of the effectiveness of branch testing and data fiow testing," IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering, 19(8):774-787, August 1993. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. 6.D. R. Fulkerson, G. L. Nemhauser, and L. E. Trotter Jr, "Two computational difficult set covering problems that arise in computing the l-width of incidence matrices of steiner triple systems," Mathematical Programming Study, 2:72-81, 1974.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. 7.M. R. Gary and D. S. Johnson, "Computers and Intractability, " Freeman, New York, 1979. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. 8.R. G. Hamlet and R. Taylor, "Partition testing does not inspire con fidence," IEEE Trans. on Soflware Engineering, 16(12):1402-141 1, Decem-ber 1990. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. 9.M. J. Harrold, R. Gupta, and M. L. Soffa, "A methodology for controlling the size of a test suite,)' ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology, 2(3):270-285, July 1993. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. 10.J. R. Horgan and S. A. London, "ATAC: A data flow coverage testing tool for C," in Proceedings of Symposium on Assessment of Quality Software Development Tools, pp. 2-10, New Orleans, LA, May 1992.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.M. Hutchins, H. Foster, T. Goradia, and T. Ostrand, "Experiments on the effectiveness of dataflow- and control flow-based test adequacy criteria," in Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 191-200, Sorrento, Italy, May 1993. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. 12.A. Koenig, "C Traps and Pitfalls, " Addison- Wesley, New York, 1988.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.S. Rapps and E. J. Weyuker, '(Selecting software test data using data flow in formation," IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering, SE-11(4):367- 375, April 1985. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. 14.W. E. Wong, "OIL Mutatton and Data Flow, " PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, Purdue University, W. Lafayette, IN, December 1993.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.W. E. Wong, J. R. Horgan, S. London, and A. P. Mathur, "Effect of test set size and block coverage on the fault detection effectiveness," in Proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering, pp. 230-238, Monterey, CA, November 1994.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.W. E. Wong and A. P. Mathur, "Fault detection effectiveness of mutation and data flow testing," Soflware Quality Journal, March 1995. (To appear)Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. 17.Y. A. Zuev, "A set-covering problem: The combinatorial-local approach and the branch and bound method," U. S.S.R Computational Mathematics and Mathematical Physics, 19(6):217-226, June 1979.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Effect of test set minimization on fault detection effectiveness

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      ICSE '95: Proceedings of the 17th international conference on Software engineering
      April 1995
      336 pages
      ISBN:0897917081
      DOI:10.1145/225014

      Copyright © 1995 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 23 April 1995

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • Article

      Acceptance Rates

      ICSE '95 Paper Acceptance Rate28of155submissions,18%Overall Acceptance Rate276of1,856submissions,15%

      Upcoming Conference

      ICSE 2025

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader