| 1 | David Schuler and Andreas Zeller
Covering and Uncovering Equivalent Mutants
Softw. Test., Verif. Reliab., 23(5), 2013. |
|
| | Abstract: Available soon... |
| | @ARTICLE{SchulerZ13,
author = {David Schuler and Andreas Zeller},
title = {Covering and Uncovering Equivalent Mutants},
journal = {Softw. Test., Verif. Reliab.},
year = {2013},
month = {},
volume = {23},
number = {5},
pages = {353--374}
} |
| 2 | Jaechang Nam and David Schuler and Andreas Zeller
Calibrated Mutation Testing
Fourth {IEEE} International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation, {ICST} 2012, Berlin, Germany, 21-25 March, 2011, Workshop Proceedings, 2011. |
|
| | Abstract: Available soon... |
| | @INPROCEEDINGS{NamSZ11,
author = {Jaechang Nam and David Schuler and Andreas Zeller},
title = {Calibrated Mutation Testing},
booktitle = {Fourth {IEEE} International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation, {ICST} 2012, Berlin, Germany, 21-25 March, 2011, Workshop Proceedings},
year = {2011},
address = {},
month = {},
pages = {376--381}
} |
| 3 | Birgit Schwarz and David Schuler and Andreas Zeller
Breeding High-Impact Mutations
Fourth {IEEE} International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation, {ICST} 2012, Berlin, Germany, 21-25 March, 2011, Workshop Proceedings, 2011. |
|
| | Abstract: Available soon... |
| | @INPROCEEDINGS{SchwarzSZ11,
author = {Birgit Schwarz and David Schuler and Andreas Zeller},
title = {Breeding High-Impact Mutations},
booktitle = {Fourth {IEEE} International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation, {ICST} 2012, Berlin, Germany, 21-25 March, 2011, Workshop Proceedings},
year = {2011},
address = {},
month = {},
pages = {382--387}
} |
| 4 | David Schuler and Andreas Zeller
(Un-)Covering Equivalent Mutants
Third International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation, {ICST} 2010, Paris, France, April 7-9, 2010, 2010. |
|
| | Abstract: Available soon... |
| | @INPROCEEDINGS{SchulerZ10,
author = {David Schuler and Andreas Zeller},
title = {(Un-)Covering Equivalent Mutants},
booktitle = {Third International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation, {ICST} 2010, Paris, France, April 7-9, 2010},
year = {2010},
address = {},
month = {},
pages = {45--54}
} |
| 5 | David Schuler and Andreas Zeller
(Un-)Covering Equivalent Mutants
Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Software Testing Verification and Validation (ICST'10)Paris, France, 6 April 2010. |
|
| | Abstract: Available soon... |
| | @INPROCEEDINGS{SchulerZ10,
author = {David Schuler and Andreas Zeller},
title = {(Un-)Covering Equivalent Mutants},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Software Testing Verification and Validation (ICST'10)},
year = {2010},
address = {Paris, France},
month = {6 April},
pages = {}
} |
| 6 | David Schuler and Valentin Dallmeier and Andreas Zeller
Efficient mutation testing by checking invariant violations
Proceedings of the Eighteenth International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis, {ISSTA} 2009, Chicago, IL, USA, July 19-23, 2009, 2009. |
|
| | Abstract: Available soon... |
| | @INPROCEEDINGS{SchulerDZ09,
author = {David Schuler and Valentin Dallmeier and Andreas Zeller},
title = {Efficient mutation testing by checking invariant violations},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the Eighteenth International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis, {ISSTA} 2009, Chicago, IL, USA, July 19-23, 2009},
year = {2009},
address = {},
month = {},
pages = {69--80}
} |
| 7 | Bernhard J. M. Gr{\"{u}}n and David Schuler and Andreas Zeller
The Impact of Equivalent Mutants
Second International Conference on Software Testing Verification and Validation, {ICST} 2009, Denver, Colorado, USA, April 1-4, 2009, Workshops Proceedings, 2009. |
|
| | Abstract: Available soon... |
| | @INPROCEEDINGS{GrunSZ09,
author = {Bernhard J. M. Gr{\"{u}}n and David Schuler and Andreas Zeller},
title = {The Impact of Equivalent Mutants},
booktitle = {Second International Conference on Software Testing Verification and Validation, {ICST} 2009, Denver, Colorado, USA, April 1-4, 2009, Workshops Proceedings},
year = {2009},
address = {},
month = {},
pages = {192--199}
} |
| 8 | David Schuler and Andreas Zeller
Javalanche: Efficient Mutation Testing for Java
Proceedings of the 7th joint meeting of the European Software Engineering Conference and the International Symposium on Foundations of Software EngineeringAmsterdam, Netherlands, 24-28 August 2009. |
|
| | Abstract: To assess the quality of a test suite, one can use mutation testing - seeding artificial defects (mutations) into the program and checking whether the test suite finds them. Javalanche is an open source framework for mutation testing Java programs with a special focus on automation, efficiency, and effectiveness. In particular, Javalanche assesses the impact of individual mutations to effectively weed out equivalent mutants; it has been demonstrated to work on programs with up to 100,000 lines of code. |
| | @INPROCEEDINGS{SchulerZ09,
author = {David Schuler and Andreas Zeller},
title = {Javalanche: Efficient Mutation Testing for Java},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the 7th joint meeting of the European Software Engineering Conference and the International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering},
year = {2009},
address = {Amsterdam, Netherlands},
month = {24-28 August},
pages = {297-298}
} |
| 9 | Bernhard J. M. Gr\"un and David Schuler and Andreas Zeller
The Impact of Equivalent Mutants
Saarland University, Saarbrucken, Telefon, 2009. |
|
| | Abstract: If a mutation is not killed by a test suite, this usuallymeans that the test suite is not adequate. However, itmay also be that the mutant keeps the program’s seman-tics unchanged—and thus cannot be detected by any test.We found such equivalent mutants to be surprisingly com-mon: In an experiment on the JAXEN XPATH query engine,8/20 = 40% of all mutations turned out to be equivalent.Worse, checking the equivalency took us 15 minutes for asingle mutation. Equivalent mutants thus make it impossi-ble to automatically assess test suites by means of mutationtesting. To identify equivalent mutants, we are currently investi-gating the impact of a mutation on the execution: the morea mutation alters the execution, the higher the chance of itbeing non-equivalent. First experiments assessing the im-pact on code coverage are promising. |
| | @TECHREPORT{GrunSZ09a,
author = {Bernhard J. M. Gr\"un and David Schuler and Andreas Zeller},
title = {The Impact of Equivalent Mutants},
institution = {Saarland University},
year = {2009},
type = {techreport},
number = {},
address = {Saarbrucken, Telefon},
month = {},
} |
| 10 | David Schuler and Valentin Dallmeier and Andreas Zeller
Efficient Mutation Testing by Checking Invariant Violations
Saarland University, Saarbrucken, Telefon, 2009. |
|
| | Abstract: Mutation testing measures the adequacy of a test suite by seeding artificial defects (mutations) into a program. If a mutation is not detected by the test suite, this usually means that the test suite is not adequate. However, it may also be that the mutant keeps the program's semantics unchanged–-and thus cannot be detected by any test. Such equivalent mutants have to be eliminated manually, which is tedious.
We assess the impact of mutations by checking dynamic invariants. In an evaluation of our Javalanche framework on seven industrial-size programs, we found that mutations that violate invariants are significantly more likely to be detectable by a test suite. As a consequence, mutations with impact on invariants should be focused upon when improving test suites. With less than 3% of equivalent mutants, our approach provides an efficient, precise, and fully automatic measure of the adequacy of a test suite. |
| | @TECHREPORT{SchulerDZ09a,
author = {David Schuler and Valentin Dallmeier and Andreas Zeller},
title = {Efficient Mutation Testing by Checking Invariant Violations},
institution = {Saarland University},
year = {2009},
type = {techreport},
number = {},
address = {Saarbrucken, Telefon},
month = {},
} |
| 11 | David Schuler and Andreas Zeller
Javalanche: efficient mutation testing for Java
Proceedings of the 7th joint meeting of the European Software Engineering Conference and the {ACM} {SIGSOFT} International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering, 2009, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, August 24-28, 2009, 2009. |
|
| | Abstract: Available soon... |
| | @INPROCEEDINGS{schuler_FSE_09,
author = {David Schuler and Andreas Zeller},
title = {Javalanche: efficient mutation testing for Java},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the 7th joint meeting of the European Software Engineering Conference and the {ACM} {SIGSOFT} International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering, 2009, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, August 24-28, 2009},
year = {2009},
address = {},
month = {},
pages = {297--298}
} |
| 12 | Bernhard J. M. Gr\"un and David Schuler and Andreas Zeller
The Impact of Equivalent Mutants
Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Mutation Analysis (MUTATION'09)Denver, Colorado, 1-4 April 2009. |
|
| | Abstract: If a mutation is not killed by a test suite, this usuallymeans that the test suite is not adequate. However, itmay also be that the mutant keeps the program’s seman-tics unchanged—and thus cannot be detected by any test.We found such equivalent mutants to be surprisingly com-mon: In an experiment on the JAXEN XPATH query engine,8/20 = 40% of all mutations turned out to be equivalent.Worse, checking the equivalency took us 15 minutes for asingle mutation. Equivalent mutants thus make it impossi-ble to automatically assess test suites by means of mutationtesting. To identify equivalent mutants, we are currently investi-gating the impact of a mutation on the execution: the morea mutation alters the execution, the higher the chance of itbeing non-equivalent. First experiments assessing the im-pact on code coverage are promising. |
| | @INPROCEEDINGS{GrunSZ09,
author = {Bernhard J. M. Gr\"un and David Schuler and Andreas Zeller},
title = {The Impact of Equivalent Mutants},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Mutation Analysis (MUTATION'09)},
year = {2009},
address = {Denver, Colorado},
month = {1-4 April},
pages = {192-199}
} |
| 13 | David Schuler and Valentin Dallmeier and Andreas Zeller
Efficient Mutation Testing by Checking Invariant Violations
Proceedings of the International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis (ISSTA'09)Chicago, Illinois, 19-23 July 2009. |
|
| | Abstract: Mutation testing measures the adequacy of a test suite by seeding artificial defects (mutations) into a program. If a mutation is not detected by the test suite, this usually means that the test suite is not adequate. However, it may also be that the mutant keeps the program's semantics unchanged–-and thus cannot be detected by any test. Such equivalent mutants have to be eliminated manually, which is tedious.
We assess the impact of mutations by checking dynamic invariants. In an evaluation of our Javalanche framework on seven industrial-size programs, we found that mutations that violate invariants are significantly more likely to be detectable by a test suite. As a consequence, mutations with impact on invariants should be focused upon when improving test suites. With less than 3% of equivalent mutants, our approach provides an efficient, precise, and fully automatic measure of the adequacy of a test suite. |
| | @INPROCEEDINGS{SchulerDZ09,
author = {David Schuler and Valentin Dallmeier and Andreas Zeller},
title = {Efficient Mutation Testing by Checking Invariant Violations},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis (ISSTA'09)},
year = {2009},
address = {Chicago, Illinois},
month = {19-23 July},
pages = {}
} |
