Distribution-Aware Mutation Analysis

Mutation analysis is widely employed to evaluate the effectiveness of various software testing techniques. In most situations, mutation operators are uniformly applied to the original programs, while the faults tend to be clustered in practice. This may result in the inappropriate simulation of faults, and thus cannot deliver the reliable evaluation results. To overcome this, we propose a distribution-aware mutation analysis technique and conducted empirical studies to investigate the impact of the mutation distribution on the effectiveness evaluation of testing techniques. As an illustration, we select the commonly practiced random testing technique and two versions of dynamic random testing techniques and apply them to testing Web services. Results of empirical studies suggest that the mutation distribution significantly affects the evaluation results. This observation further indicates that the effectiveness of testing techniques previously evaluated with the uniform mutation analysis needs further realignments.

[1]  A. Jefferson Offutt,et al.  Mutation 2000: uniting the orthogonal , 2001 .

[2]  Huai Liu,et al.  Metamorphic Testing for Web Services: Framework and a Case Study , 2011, 2011 IEEE International Conference on Web Services.

[3]  Eda Marchetti,et al.  WS-TAXI: A WSDL-based Testing Tool for Web Services , 2009, 2009 International Conference on Software Testing Verification and Validation.

[4]  Mark Harman,et al.  An Analysis and Survey of the Development of Mutation Testing , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[5]  Chang-ai Sun,et al.  Enhanced Random Testing for Programs with High Dimensional Input Domains , 2007, SEKE.

[6]  Gregg Rothermel,et al.  An experimental determination of sufficient mutant operators , 1996, TSEM.

[7]  Wei-Tek Tsai,et al.  Ontology-Based Test Modeling and Partition Testing of Web Services , 2008, 2008 IEEE International Conference on Web Services.

[8]  Lionel C. Briand,et al.  Is mutation an appropriate tool for testing experiments? , 2005, ICSE.

[9]  A. Jefferson Offutt,et al.  An experimental mutation system for Java , 2004, SOEN.

[10]  Reiko Heckel,et al.  Towards Contract-based Testing of Web Services , 2005, Electron. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci..

[11]  Tatsuhiro Tsuchiya,et al.  On fault classes and error detection capability of specification-based testing , 2002, TSEM.

[12]  Tsong Yueh Chen,et al.  An upper bound on software testing effectiveness , 2008, TSEM.

[13]  Huai Liu,et al.  A Metamorphic Relation-Based Approach to Testing Web Services Without Oracles , 2012, Int. J. Web Serv. Res..

[14]  Kai-Yuan Cai,et al.  An Overview of Software Cybernetics , 2003, STEP.

[15]  W. Eric Wong,et al.  Reducing the cost of mutation testing: An empirical study , 1995, J. Syst. Softw..

[16]  Mark Harman,et al.  Constructing Subtle Faults Using Higher Order Mutation Testing , 2008, 2008 Eighth IEEE International Working Conference on Source Code Analysis and Manipulation.

[17]  Kai-Yuan Cai,et al.  Towards Dynamic Random Testing for Web Services , 2012, 2012 IEEE 36th Annual Computer Software and Applications Conference.

[18]  Glenford J. Myers,et al.  Art of Software Testing , 1979 .

[19]  Richard J. Lipton,et al.  Hints on Test Data Selection: Help for the Practicing Programmer , 1978, Computer.

[20]  Mario Piattini,et al.  Decreasing the cost of mutation testing with second‐order mutants , 2009, Softw. Test. Verification Reliab..

[21]  Larry J Morell,et al.  A Theory of Fault-Based Testing , 1990, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[22]  Ruth Breu,et al.  Model Driven Testing of SOA – based Software , 2007 .

[23]  A. Jefferson Offutt,et al.  Generating test cases for web services using data perturbation , 2004, SOEN.

[24]  Tao Xie,et al.  Is operator-based mutant selection superior to random mutant selection? , 2010, 2010 ACM/IEEE 32nd International Conference on Software Engineering.