Context. The equivalent mutant problem (EMP) is one of the crucial problems in mutation testing widely studied over decades. Objectives. The objectives are: to present a systematic literature review (SLR) in the field of EMP; to identify, classify and improve the existing, or implement new, methods which try to overcome EMP and evaluate them. Method. We performed SLR based on the search of digital libraries. We implemented four second order mutation (SOM) strategies, in addition to first order mutation (FOM), and compared them from different perspectives. Results. Our SLR identified 17 relevant techniques (in 22 articles) and three categories of techniques: detecting (DEM); suggesting (SEM); and avoiding equivalent mutant generation (AEMG). The experiment indicated that SOM in general and JudyDiffOp strategy in particular provide the best results in the following areas: total number of mutants generated; the association between the type of mutation strategy and whether the generated mutants were equivalent or not; the number of not killed mutants; mutation testing time; time needed for manual classification. Conclusions . The results in the DEM category are still far from perfect. Thus, the SEM and AEMG categories have been developed. The JudyDiffOp algorithm achieved good results in many areas.

Available soon...

Available soon...

Popular code coverage measures, such as branch coverage, are indicators of the thoroughness rather than the fault detection capability of test suites. Mutation testing is a fault-based technique that measures the effectiveness of test suites for fault localisation. Unfortunately, use of mutation testing in the software industry is rare because generating and running vast numbers of mutants against the test cases is time-consuming and difficult to do without an automated, fast and reliable tool. Our objective is to present an innovative approach to mutation testing that takes advantage of a novel aspect-oriented programming mechanism, called `pointcut and advice`, to avoid multiple compilation of mutants and, therefore, to speed up mutation testing. An empirical comparison of the performance of the developed tool, called Judy, with the MuJava mutation testing tool on 24 open-source projects demonstrates the value of the presented approach. The results show that there is a statistically significant (t(23) = -12.28, p < 0.0005, effect size d = 3.43) difference in the number of mutants generated per second between MuJava (M = 4.15, SD = 1.42) and Judy (M = 52.05, SD = 19.69). Apart from being statistically significant, this effect is considered very large and, therefore, represents a substantive finding. This therefore allows us to estimate the fault detection effectiveness of test suites of much larger systems.