nach oben

Empirical Software Engineering

Erschienen in:

01.03.2022

Software testing and Android applications: a large-scale empirical study

verfasst von: Fabiano Pecorelli, Gemma Catolino, Filomena Ferrucci, Andrea De Lucia, Fabio Palomba

Erschienen in: Empirical Software Engineering | Ausgabe 2/2022

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

These days, over three billion users rely on mobile applications (a.k.a. apps) on a daily basis to access high-speed connectivity and all kinds of services it enables, from social to emergency needs. Having high-quality apps is therefore a vital requirement for developers to keep staying on the market and acquire new users. For this reason, the research community has been devising automated strategies to better test these applications. Despite the effort spent so far, most developers write their test cases manually without the adoption of any tool. Nevertheless, we still observe a lack of knowledge on the quality of these manually written tests: an enhanced understanding of this aspect may provide evidence-based findings on the current status of testing in the wild and point out future research directions to better support the daily activities of mobile developers. We perform a large-scale empirical study targeting 1,693 open-source Android apps and aiming at assessing (1) the extent to which these apps are actually tested, (2) how well-designed are the available tests, (3) what is their effectiveness, and (4) how well manual tests can reduce the risk of having defects in production code. In addition, we conduct a focus group with 5 Android testing experts to discuss the findings achieved and gather insights into the next research avenues to undertake. The key results of our study show Android apps are poorly tested and the available tests have low (i) design quality, (ii) effectiveness, and (iii) ability to find defects in production code. Among the various suggestions, testing experts report the need for improved mechanisms to locate potential defects and deal with the complexity of creating tests that effectively exercise the production code.

Vorheriger Artikel An empirical investigation of command-line customization

Nächster Artikel CT-IoT: a combinatorial testing-based path selection framework for effective IoT testing

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

https://f-droid.org

https://github.com

With respect to our previous conference paper (Pecorelli et al. 2020b), the number of apps considered decreased from 1,780 to 1,693 because 87 of them were not available anymore at the time of the journal extension.

A well-known security company targeting mobile apps: https://tinyurl.com/rdhrszc

https://github.com/arturdm/jacoco-android-gradle-plugin

Link: https://pydriller.readthedocs.io/.

https://www.zoom.us/en/

https://cucumber.io

https://f-droid.org/en/packages/name.gdr.acastus_photon/

https://pitest.org

Antoine J-Y, Villaneau J, Lefeuvre A (2014) Weighted krippendorff’s alpha is a more reliable metrics for multi-coders ordinal annotations: experimental studies on emotion opinion and coreference annotation

B. of Apps There are 12 million mobile developers worldwide, and nearly half develop for android first. https://goo.gl/RNCSHC

Balogh G, Gergely T, Beszédes Á, Gyimóthy T (2016) Are my unit tests in the right package?. In: 2016 IEEE 16th international working conference on source code analysis and manipulation (SCAM). IEEE, pp 137–146

Basili V R, Briand L C, Melo W L (1996) A validation of object-oriented design metrics as quality indicators. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 22(10):751–761CrossRef

Bavota G, Qusef A, Oliveto R, De Lucia A, Binkley D (2012) An empirical analysis of the distribution of unit test smells and their impact on software maintenance. In: 2012 28th IEEE international conference on software maintenance (ICSM). IEEE, pp 56–65

Bavota G, Linares-Vasquez M, Bernal-Cardenas C E, Di Penta M, Oliveto R, Poshyvanyk D (2014) The impact of api change-and fault-proneness on the user ratings of android apps. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 41(4):384–407CrossRef

Bavota G, Qusef A, Oliveto R, De Lucia A, Binkley D (2015) Are test smells really harmful? An empirical study. Empir Softw Eng 20(4):1052–1094CrossRef

Beller M, Gousios G, Panichella A, Zaidman A (2015) When, how, and why developers (do not) test in their ides. In: Proceedings of the 2015 10th joint meeting on foundations of software engineering, ser. ESEC/FSE 2015. [Online]. Available: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2786805.2786843. ACM, New York, pp 179–190

Beller M, Gousios G, Panichella A, Proksch S, Amann S, Zaidman A (2017) Developer testing in the ide: patterns, beliefs, and behavior. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 45(3):261–284CrossRef

Buse R P, Weimer W R (2010) Learning a metric for code readability. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 36(4):546–558CrossRef

Catolino G (2018) Does source code quality reflect the ratings of apps?. In: Proceedings of the 5th international conference on mobile software engineering and systems. ACM, pp 43–44

Catolino G, Di Nucci D, Ferrucci F (2019a) Cross-project just-in-time bug prediction for mobile apps: an empirical assessment. In: 2019 IEEE/ACM 6th international conference on mobile software engineering and systems (MOBILESoft). IEEE, pp 99–110

Catolino G, Palomba F, Zaidman A, Ferrucci F (2019b) How the experience of development teams relates to assertion density of test classes. In: 2019 IEEE 35th international conference on software maintenance and evolution (ICSME). IEEE, p. to appear

Catolino G, Palomba F, Zaidman A, Ferrucci F (2019c) Not all bugs are the same: understanding, characterizing, and classifying bug types. J Syst Softw 152:165–181CrossRef

Chen M -H, Lyu M R, Wong W E (2001) Effect of code coverage on software reliability measurement. IEEE Trans Reliab 50(2):165–170CrossRef

Chidamber S R, Kemerer C F (1994) A metrics suite for object oriented design. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 20(6):476–493CrossRef

Choudhary S R, Gorla A, Orso A (2015) Automated test input generation for android: are we there yet?. In: 2015 30th IEEE/ACM international conference on automated software engineering ASE. IEEE, pp 429–440

Cleary M, Horsfall J, Hayter M (2014) Data collection and sampling in qualitative research: does size matter? J Adv Nurs 70(3):473–475CrossRef

Counsell S, Swift S, Crampton J (2006) The interpretation and utility of three cohesion metrics for object-oriented design. ACM Trans Softw Eng Methodol (TOSEM) 15(2):123–149CrossRef

Creswell J W (1999) Mixed-method research: introduction and application. In: Handbook of educational policy. Elsevier, pp 455–472

Cruz L, Abreu R, Lo D (2019) To the attention of mobile software developers: guess what, test your app! Empir Softw Eng 1–31

D’Ambros M, Bacchelli A, Lanza M (2010) On the impact of design flaws on software defects. In: 2010 10th international conference on quality software. IEEE, pp 23–31

Das T, Di Penta M, Malavolta I (2016) A quantitative and qualitative investigation of performance-related commits in android apps. In: 2016 IEEE International conference on software maintenance and evolution (ICSME). IEEE, pp 443–447

Di Nucci D, Palomba F, Prota A, Panichella A, Zaidman A, De Lucia A (2017) Software-based energy profiling of android apps: simple, efficient and reliable?. In: 2017 IEEE 24th international conference on software analysis, evolution and reengineering (SANER). IEEE, pp 103–114

Di Nucci D, Palomba F, De Rosa G, Bavota G, Oliveto R, De Lucia A (2018) A developer centered bug prediction model. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 44(1):5–24CrossRef

Draper N R, Smith H (2014) Applied regression analysis, vol 326. Wiley, New York

Eck M, Palomba F, Castelluccio M, Bacchelli A (2019) Understanding flaky tests: the developer’s perspective, p to appear

Etzkorn L H, Gholston S E, Fortune J L, Stein C E, Utley D, Farrington P A, Cox G W (2004) A comparison of cohesion metrics for object-oriented systems. Inf Softw Technol 46(10):677–687CrossRef

Fischer M, Pinzger M, Gall H (2003) Populating a release history database from version control and bug tracking systems. In: ICSM 2003. Proceedings. International conference on software maintenance, 2003. IEEE, pp 23–32

Fowler M, Beck K (1999) Refactoring: improving the design of existing code. Addison-Wesley Professional

Fraser G, Arcuri A (2011) Evosuite: automatic test suite generation for object-oriented software. In: Proceedings of the 19th ACM SIGSOFT symposium and the 13th European conference on foundations of software engineering, ser. ESEC/FSE ’11. [Online]. Available: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2025113.2025179. ACM, New York, pp 416–419

Fregnan E, Baum T, Palomba F, Bacchelli A (2018) A survey on software coupling relations and tools. Inf Softw Technol 107:159–178CrossRef

Gao J, Tsai W-T, Paul R, Bai X, Uehara T (2014) Mobile testing-as-a-service (mtaas)–infrastructures, issues, solutions and needs. In: 2014 IEEE 15th international symposium on high-assurance systems engineering. IEEE, pp 158–167

Garousi V, Küçük B (2018) Smells in software test code: a survey of knowledge in industry and academia. J Syst Softw 138:52–81CrossRef

Geiger F-X, Malavolta I (2018) Datasets of android applications: a literature review. arXiv:1809.10069

Geiger F -X, Malavolta I, Pascarella L, Palomba F, Di Nucci D, Bacchelli A (2018) A graph-based dataset of commit history of real-world android apps. In: Proceedings of the 15th international conference on mining software repositories. ACM, pp 30–33

Gilbert P, Chun B-G, Cox LP, Jung J (2011) Vision: automated security validation of mobile apps at app markets. In: Proceedings of the second international workshop on mobile cloud computing and services. ACM, pp 21–26

Gopinath R, Jensen C, Groce A (2014) Code coverage for suite evaluation by developers. In: Proceedings of the 36th international conference on software engineering. ACM, pp 72–82

Gopinath R, Ahmed I, Alipour M A, Jensen C, Groce A (2017) Mutation reduction strategies considered harmful. IEEE Trans Reliab 66(3):854–874CrossRef

Grano G, Ciurumelea A, Panichella S, Palomba F, Gall H C (2018a) Exploring the integration of user feedback in automated testing of android applications. In: 2018 IEEE 25th international conference on software analysis, evolution and reengineering. IEEE, pp 72–83

Grano G, Scalabrino S, Oliveto R, Gall H (2018b) An empirical investigation on the readability of manual and generated test cases. In: Proceedings of the 26th international conference on program comprehension

Grano G, Palomba F, Di Nucci D, De Lucia A, Gall H C (2019) Scented since the beginning: on the diffuseness of test smells in automatically generated test code. J Syst Softw 156:312–327CrossRef

Grano G, De Iaco C, Palomba F, Gall H C (2020) Pizza versus pinsa: on the perception and measurability of unit test code quality. In: 2020 IEEE international conference on software maintenance and evolution (ICSME). IEEE, pp 336–347

Graves T L, Karr A F, Marron J S, Siy H (2000) Predicting fault incidence using software change history. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 26(7):653–661CrossRef

Greiler M, Van Deursen A., Storey M -A (2013) Automated detection of test fixture strategies and smells. In: Software testing, verification and validation (ICST), pp 322–331

Halekoh U, Højsgaard S, Yan J et al (2006) The r package geepack for generalized estimating equations. J Stat Softw 15(2):1–11CrossRef

Hall T, Zhang M, Bowes D, Sun Y (2014) Some code smells have a significant but small effect on faults. ACM Trans Softw Eng Methodol (TOSEM) 23 (4):33CrossRef

Hassan A E (2009) Predicting faults using the complexity of code changes. In: IEEE 31st international conference on software engineering, 2009. ICSE 2009. IEEE, pp 78–88

Henderson-Sellers B, Constantine L L, Graham I M (1996) Coupling and cohesion (towards a valid metrics suite for object-oriented analysis and design). Object Oriented Syst 3(3):143–158

Hindle A, Wilson A, Rasmussen K, Barlow E J, Campbell J C, Romansky S (2014) Greenminer: a hardware based mining software repositories software energy consumption framework. In: Proceedings of the 11th working conference on mining software repositories, pp 12–21

Iannone E, Pecorelli F, Di Nucci D, Palomba F, De Lucia A (2020) Refactoring android-specific energy smells: a plugin for android studio. In: Proceedings of the 28th international conference on program comprehension, pp 451–455

Jia Y, Harman M (2011) An analysis and survey of the development of mutation testing. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 37(5):649–678CrossRef

Joorabchi M E, Mesbah A, Kruchten P (2013) Real challenges in mobile app development. In: 2013 ACM/IEEE international symposium on empirical software engineering and measurement. IEEE, pp 15–24

Kamei Y, Shihab E, Adams B, Hassan A E, Mockus A, Sinha A, Ubayashi N (2013) A large-scale empirical study of just-in-time quality assurance. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 39(6):757–773CrossRef

Khomh F, Di Penta M, Guéhéneuc Y -G, Antoniol G (2012) An exploratory study of the impact of antipatterns on class change-and fault-proneness. Empir Softw Eng 17(3):243–275CrossRef

Kim S, Zimmermann T, Whitehead E J Jr, Zeller A (2007) Predicting faults from cached history. In: Proceedings of the 29th international conference on software engineering. IEEE Computer Society, pp 489–498

Kim S, Whitehead E J, Zhang Y (2008) Classifying software changes: clean or buggy? IEEE Trans Softw Eng 34(2):181–196CrossRef

Kim H, Choi B, Wong WE (2009) Performance testing of mobile applications at the unit test level. In: 2009 Third IEEE international conference on secure software integration and reliability improvement. IEEE, pp 171–180

Khalid H, Shihab E, Nagappan M, Hassan A E (2014) What do mobile app users complain about? IEEE Softw 32(3):70–77CrossRef

Kochhar P S, Thung F, Nagappan N, Zimmermann T, Lo D (2015) Understanding the test automation culture of app developers. In: 2015 IEEE 8th international conference on software testing, verification and validation ICST. IEEE, pp 1–10

Koru A G, Zhang D, El Emam K, Liu H (2009) An investigation into the functional form of the size-defect relationship for software modules. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 35(2):293–304CrossRef

Krippendorff K (2018) Content analysis: an introduction to its methodologys. Sage publications

Krutz DE, Mirakhorli M, Malachowsky SA, Ruiz A, Peterson J, Filipski A, Smith J (2015) A dataset of open-source android applications. In: Proceedings of the 12th working conference on mining software repositories. IEEE Press, pp 522–525

Kudrjavets G, Nagappan N, Ball T (2006) Assessing the relationship between software assertions and faults: an empirical investigation. In: 2006 17th International symposium on software reliability engineering. IEEE, pp 204–212

Laaber C, Leitner P (2018) An evaluation of open-source software microbenchmark suites for continuous performance assessment. In: Proceedings of the 15th international conference on mining software repositories. ACM, pp 119–130

Leicht N, Blohm I, Leimeister J M (2017) Leveraging the power of the crowd for software testing. IEEE Softw 34(2):62–69CrossRef

Lin J -W, Salehnamadi N, Malek S (2020) Test automation in open-source android apps: a large-scale empirical study. In: 2020 35th IEEE/ACM international conference on automated software engineering (ASE). IEEE, pp 1078–1089

Linares-Vásquez M, Klock S, McMillan C, Sabané A, Poshyvanyk D, Guéhéneuc Y -G (2014) Domain matters: bringing further evidence of the relationships among anti-patterns, application domains, and quality-related metrics in java mobile apps. In: Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on program comprehension, pp 232–243

Linares-Vásquez M, Moran K, Poshyvanyk D (2017a) Continuous, evolutionary and large-scale: a new perspective for automated mobile app testing. In: 2017 IEEE International conference on software maintenance and evolution ICSME. IEEE, pp 399–410

Linares-Vásquez M, Bernal-Cárdenas C, Moran K, Poshyvanyk D (2017b) How do developers test android applications?. In: 2017 IEEE international conference on software maintenance and evolution ICSME. IEEE, pp 613–622

Luo Q, Hariri F, Eloussi L, Marinov D (2014) An empirical analysis of flaky tests. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on foundations of software engineering. ACM, pp 643–653

Machiry A, Tahiliani R, Naik M (2013) Dynodroid: an input generation system for android apps. In: Proceedings of the 2013 9th joint meeting on foundations of software engineering. ACM, pp 224–234

Marick B, et al. (1999) How to misuse code coverage. In: Proceedings of the 16th international conference on testing computer software, pp 16–18

Mateus B G, Martinez M (2019) An empirical study on quality of android applications written in kotlin language. Empir Softw Eng 24(6):3356–3393CrossRef

Mao K, Harman M, Jia Y (2016) Sapienz: multi-objective automated testing for android applications. In: Proceedings of the 25th international symposium on software testing and analysis. ACM, pp 94–105

Martin W, Sarro F, Jia Y, Zhang Y, Harman M (2016) A survey of app store analysis for software engineering. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 43 (9):817–847CrossRef

McIlroy S, Ali N, Hassan A E (2016) Fresh apps: an empirical study of frequently-updated mobile apps in the google play store. Empir Softw Eng 21(3):1346–1370CrossRef

Mesbah A, Prasad M R (2011) Automated cross-browser compatibility testing. In: Proceedings of the 33rd international conference on software engineering. ACM, pp 561–570

Meszaros G (2007) xUnit test patterns: refactoring test code. Pearson Education

Minelli R, Lanza M (2013) Software analytics for mobile applications–insights & lessons learned. In: 2013 17Th European conference on software maintenance and reengineering. IEEE, pp 144–153

Moha N, Gueheneuc Y -G, Duchien L, Le Meur A -F (2010) Decor: a method for the specification and detection of code and design smells. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 36(1):20–36MATHCrossRef

Mojica I J, Adams B, Nagappan M, Dienst S, Berger T, Hassan A E (2013) A large-scale empirical study on software reuse in mobile apps. IEEE Softw 31(2):78–86CrossRef

Moonen L (2001) Generating robust parsers using island grammars. In: Proceedings of the eighth working conference on reverse engineering, WCRE’01, Stuttgart, Germany, October 2–5, 2001, p 13

Morales R, Saborido R, Khomh F, Chicano F, Antoniol G (2016) Anti-patterns and the energy efficiency of android applications. arXiv:1610.05711

Muccini H, Di Francesco A, Esposito P (2012) Software testing of mobile applications: challenges and future research directions. In: Proceedings of the 7th international workshop on automation of software test. IEEE Press, pp 29–35

Myers G J, Sandler C, Badgett T (2011) The art of software testing. Wiley, New York

Nagappan M, Shihab E (2016) Future trends in software engineering research for mobile apps. In: 2016 IEEE 23rd International conference on software analysis, evolution, and reengineering (SANER), vol 5. IEEE, pp 21–32

Nagappan N, Williams L, Vouk M, Osborne J (2005) Early estimation of software quality using in-process testing metrics: a controlled case study. ACM SIGSOFT Softw Eng Notes 30(4):1–7CrossRef

Nagappan N, Maximilien E M, Bhat T, Williams L (2008) Realizing quality improvement through test driven development: results and experiences of four industrial teams. Empir Softw Eng 13(3):289–302CrossRef

Nagappan N, Zeller A, Zimmermann T, Herzig K, Murphy B (2010) Change bursts as defect predictors. In: 2010 IEEE 21St international symposium on software reliability engineering. IEEE, pp 309–318

Nayebi M, Adams B, Ruhe G (2016) Release practices for mobile apps–what do users and developers think?. In: 2016 IEEE 23rd international conference on software analysis, evolution, and reengineering (saner), vol 1. IEEE, pp 552–562

Nelder J A, Wedderburn R W (1972) Generalized linear models. J Ro Stat Soc: Ser A (General) 135(3):370–384CrossRef

N. Y. Times (2020) How covid19 has changed social interactions. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/07/technology/coronavirus-internet-use.html

O’Brien R M (2007) A caution regarding rules of thumb for variance inflation factors. Qual Quant 41(5):673–690CrossRef

Palomba F, Bavota G, Di Penta M, Oliveto R, Poshyvanyk D, De Lucia A (2015) Mining version histories for detecting code smells. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 41(5):462–489CrossRef

Palomba F, Panichella A, Zaidman A, Oliveto R, De Lucia A (2016a) Automatic test case generation: what if test code quality matters?. In: Proceedings of the 25th international symposium on software testing and analysis. ACM, pp 130–141

Palomba F, Di Nucci D, Panichella A, Oliveto R, De Lucia A (2016b) On the diffusion of test smells in automatically generated test code: an empirical study. In: Proceedings of the 9th international workshop on search-based software testing. ACM, pp 5–14

Palomba F, Salza P, Ciurumelea A, Panichella S, Gall H, Ferrucci F, De Lucia A (2017a) Recommending and localizing change requests for mobile apps based on user reviews. In: Proceedings of the 39th international conference on software engineering. IEEE Press, pp 106–117

Palomba F, Zaidman A, Oliveto R, De Lucia A (2017b) An exploratory study on the relationship between changes and refactoring. In: 2017 IEEE/ACM 25th International conference on program comprehension (ICPC). IEEE, pp 176–185

Palomba F, Zanoni M, Fontana F A, De Lucia A, Oliveto R (2017c) Toward a smell-aware bug prediction model. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 45 (2):194–218CrossRef

Palomba F, Bavota G, Di Penta M, Fasano F, Oliveto R, De Lucia A (2017d) On the diffuseness and the impact on maintainability of code smells: a large scale empirical investigation. Empir Softw Eng 23(3):1188–1221CrossRef

Palomba F, Linares-Vásquez M, Bavota G, Oliveto R, Di Penta M, Poshyvanyk D, De Lucia A (2018a) Crowdsourcing user reviews to support the evolution of mobile apps. J Syst Softw 137:143–162CrossRef

Palomba F, Zaidman A, De Lucia A (2018b) Automatic test smell detection using information retrieval techniques. In: 2018 IEEE International conference on software maintenance and evolution (ICSME). IEEE, pp 311–322

Palomba F, Panichella A, Zaidman A, Oliveto R, De Lucia A (2018c) The scent of a smell: an extensive comparison between textual and structural smells. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 44(10):977–1000CrossRef

Palomba F, Bavota G, Di Penta M, Fasano F, Oliveto R, De Lucia A (2018d) A large-scale empirical study on the lifecycle of code smell co-occurrences. Inf Softw Technol 99:1–10CrossRef

Palomba F, Bavota G, Di Penta M, Fasano F, Oliveto R, De Lucia A (2018e) On the diffuseness and the impact on maintainability of code smells: a large scale empirical investigation. Empir Softw Eng 23(3):1188–1221CrossRef

Palomba F, Di Nucci D, Panichella A, Zaidman A, De Lucia A (2019) On the impact of code smells on the energy consumption of mobile applications. Inf Softw Technol 105:43–55CrossRef

Panichella S, Panichella A, Beller M, Zaidman A, Gall H C (2016) The impact of test case summaries on bug fixing performance: an empirical investigation. In: Proceedings of the 38th international conference on software engineering, pp 547–558

Pecorelli F, Palomba F, Di Nucci D, De Lucia A (2019) Comparing heuristic and machine learning approaches for metric-based code smell detection

Pecorelli F, Palomba F, De Lucia A (2020a) The relation of test-related factors to software quality: a case study on apache systems. Empir Softw Eng xxx, no. xxx, p xxx

Pecorelli F, Catolino G, Ferrucci F, De Lucia A, Palomba F (2020b) Testing of mobile applications in the wild: a large-scale empirical study on android apps. In: Proceedings of the 28th international conference on program comprehension, pp 296–307

Pecorelli F, Catolino G, Ferrucci F, De Lucia A, Palomba F (2021) Software testing and android applications: a large-scale empirical study—online appendix. https://github.com/sesa-lab/onlineappendices/tree/main/EMSE21-mobileapps

Peruma A, Almalki K, Newman C D, Mkaouer M W, Ouni A, Palomba F (2019) On the distribution of test smells in open source android applications: an exploratory study. In: CASCON, pp 193–202

Peruma A, Newman C D, Mkaouer M W, Ouni A, Palomba F (2020) An exploratory study on the refactoring of unit test files in android applications. In: Conference on software engineering workshops (ICSEW’20)

Pham R, Kiesling S, Liskin O, Singer L, Schneider K (2014) Enablers, inhibitors, and perceptions of testing in novice software teams. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on foundations of software engineering. ACM, pp 30–40

Pidgeon N, Henwood K (2004) Grounded theory. na

Rossi P H, Wright J D, Anderson AB (2013) Handbook of survey research. Academic Press, New York

Salza P, Palomba F, Di Nucci D, De Lucia A, Ferrucci F (2019) Third-party libraries in mobile apps. Empir Softw Eng 25(3):2341–2377CrossRef

Shapiro S S, Wilk M B (1965) An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). Biometrika 52(3/4):591–611MathSciNetMATHCrossRef

Silva D B, Endo A T, Eler M M, Durelli V H (2016) An analysis of automated tests for mobile android applications. In: 2016 XLII Latin American computing conference CLEI. IEEE, pp 1–9

Śliwerski J, Zimmermann T, Zeller A (2005) When do changes induce fixes?. In: ACM Sigsoft software engineering notes, vol 30, no 4. ACM, pp 1–5

Spadini D, Palomba F, Zaidman A, Bruntink M, Bacchelli A (2018) On the relation of test smells to software code quality. In: 2018 IEEE international conference on software maintenance and evolution (ICSME). IEEE, pp 1–12

Spearman C (1904) The proof and measurement of association between two things. Am J Psychol 15(1):72–101CrossRef

Spinellis D (2005) Tool writing: a forgotten art? (software tools). IEEE Softw 22(4):9–11CrossRef

Statista (2020) Number of smartphone users worldwide. https://www.statista.com/statistics/330695/number-of-smartphone-users-worldwide/

Tamburri D A, Palomba F, Kazman R (2020) Success and failure in software engineering: a followup systematic literature review. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 68(2):599–611CrossRef

Tufano M, Palomba F, Bavota G, Di Penta M, Oliveto R, De Lucia A, Poshyvanyk D (2016) An empirical investigation into the nature of test smells. In: Proceedings of the 31st IEEE/ACM international conference on automated software engineering, pp 4–15

Tufano M, Palomba F, Bavota G, Oliveto R, Di Penta M, De Lucia A, Poshyvanyk D (2017) When and why your code starts to smell bad (and whether the smells go away). IEEE Trans Softw Eng 43(11):1063–1088CrossRef

Ujhazi B, Ferenc R, Poshyvanyk D, Gyimothy T (2010) New conceptual coupling and cohesion metrics for object-oriented systems. In: 2010 10th IEEE working conference on source code analysis and manipulation. IEEE, pp 33–42

Vahabzadeh A, Fard A M, Mesbah A (2015) An empirical study of bugs in test code. In: 2015 IEEE international conference on software maintenance and evolution (ICSME). IEEE, pp 101–110

Van Deursen A, Moonen L, van den Bergh A, Kok G (2001) Refactoring test code. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on extreme programming and flexible processes in software engineering (XP2001), pp 92–95

Van Rompaey B, Demeyer S (2009) Establishing traceability links between unit test cases and units under test. In: 2009 13th European conference on software maintenance and reengineering. IEEE, pp 209–218

Van Rompaey B, Du Bois B, Demeyer S, Rieger M (2007) On the detection of test smells: a metrics-based approach for general fixture and eager test. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 33(12):800–817CrossRef

Wasserman T (2010) Software engineering issues for mobile application development

Wei Y, Meyer B, Oriol M (2012) Is branch coverage a good measure of testing effectiveness?. In: Empirical software engineering and verification. Springer, pp 194–212

Wei L, Liu Y, Cheung S -C (2016) Taming android fragmentation: characterizing and detecting compatibility issues for android apps. In: 2016 31st IEEE/ACM international conference on automated software engineering (ASE). IEEE, pp 226–237

Wilkinson S (1998) Focus group methodology: a review. Int J Social Res Methodol 1(3):181–203CrossRef

Yang J, Zhikhartsev A, Liu Y, Tan L (2017) Better test cases for better automated program repair. In: Proceedings of the 2017 11th joint meeting on foundations of software engineering, pp 831–841

Yu CS, Treude C, Aniche M (2019) Comprehending test code: an empirical study. p to appear

Zazworka N, Shaw M A, Shull F, Seaman C (2011) Investigating the impact of design debt on software quality. In: Proceedings of the 2nd workshop on managing technical debt. ACM, pp 17–23

Zimmermann T, Premraj R, Zeller A (2007) Predicting defects for eclipse. In: Third international workshop on predictor models in software engineering (PROMISE’07: ICSE workshops 2007). IEEE, pp 9–9

Zhang J, Sagar S, Shihab E (2013) The evolution of mobile apps: an exploratory study. In: Proceedings of the 2013 international workshop on software development lifecycle for mobile. ACM, pp 1–8

Titel: Software testing and Android applications: a large-scale empirical study
verfasst von: Fabiano Pecorelli
Gemma Catolino
Filomena Ferrucci
Andrea De Lucia
Fabio Palomba
Publikationsdatum: 01.03.2022
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Empirical Software Engineering / Ausgabe 2/2022
Print ISSN: 1382-3256
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-7616
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-021-10059-5

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2022

An empirical investigation of command-line customization

CT-IoT: a combinatorial testing-based path selection framework for effective IoT testing

Analysing app reviews for software engineering: a systematic literature review

Propagating frugal user feedback through closeness of code dependencies to improve IR-based traceability recovery

Inter-team communication in large-scale co-located software engineering: a case study

A study of gender in user reviews on the Google Play Store

Premium Partner