Reductions of Operators in Java Mutation Testing

The objective of this chapter is to explore the reduction of computational costs of mutation testing of Java programs by selective mutations – omitting mutants generated for a mutation operator. The approaches to reduce the effort in mutation testing are briefly described. The idea of choosing a mutations operator and omitting mutants generated by it is described, next several experiments, conducted in the Eclipse environment using MuClipse and CodePro plugins, are presented in details. Two especially designed and implemented tools: Mutants Remover and Console Output Analyser were also used in experiments. Mutation score was used to evaluate the effectiveness of selective mutation testing.

[1]  John J. Marciniak,et al.  Encyclopedia of Software Engineering , 1994, Encyclopedia of Software Engineering.

[2]  Timothy Alan Budd,et al.  Mutation analysis of program test data , 1980 .

[3]  Ilona Bluemke,et al.  A Comparison of Dataflow and Mutation Testing of Java Methods , 2011 .

[4]  Lech Madeyski,et al.  Judy - a mutation testing tool for Java , 2010, IET Softw..

[5]  Tomasz Walkowiak,et al.  Dependable Computer Systems , 2011 .

[6]  Ilona Bluemke,et al.  Reduction of Computational Cost in Mutation Testing by Sampling Mutants , 2013, DepCoS-RELCOMEX.

[7]  Mario Piattini,et al.  Decreasing the cost of mutation testing with second-order mutants , 2009 .

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

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

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

[11]  Mario Piattini,et al.  Mutation Testing , 2014, IEEE Software.

[12]  Vincent Beroulle,et al.  Mutation sampling technique for the generation of structural test data , 2005, Design, Automation and Test in Europe.

[13]  Macario Polo,et al.  Parallel mutation testing , 2013, Softw. Test. Verification Reliab..

[14]  Sergio Segura,et al.  Mutation testing on an object-oriented framework: An experience report , 2011, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[15]  Tomasz Walkowiak,et al.  New Results in Dependability and Computer Systems: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Dependability and Complex Systems DepCoS-RELCOMEX, September 9-13, 2013, Brunów, Poland , 2013, "DepCoS-RELCOMEX.

[16]  A. Jefferson Offutt,et al.  Constraint-Based Automatic Test Data Generation , 1991, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[17]  A. Nadeem,et al.  Object oriented mutation testing: A survey , 2012, 2012 International Conference on Emerging Technologies.

[18]  J.H. Andrews,et al.  Is mutation an appropriate tool for testing experiments? [software testing] , 2005, Proceedings. 27th International Conference on Software Engineering, 2005. ICSE 2005..

[19]  Anna Derezinska,et al.  Quality Evaluation of Object-Oriented and Standard Mutation Operators Applied to C# Programs , 2012, TOOLS.

[20]  John A. Clark,et al.  MESSI: Mutant Evaluation by Static Semantic Interpretation , 2012, 2012 IEEE Fifth International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation.

[21]  Anna Derezinska,et al.  A Quality Estimation of Mutation Clustering in C# Programs , 2013, DepCoS-RELCOMEX.

[22]  Andreas Zeller,et al.  The Impact of Equivalent Mutants , 2009, 2009 International Conference on Software Testing, Verification, and Validation Workshops.

[23]  Antonio Vallecillo,et al.  Objects, Models, Components, Patterns , 2011, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

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

[25]  Mark Harman,et al.  Using program slicing to assist in the detection of equivalent mutants , 1999, Softw. Test. Verification Reliab..

[26]  Leonardo Bottaci,et al.  Efficiency of mutation operators and selective mutation strategies: an empirical study , 1999 .

[27]  A. Jefferson Offutt,et al.  Automatically detecting equivalent mutants and infeasible paths , 1997 .

[28]  J. Voas,et al.  Software Testability: The New Verification , 1995, IEEE Softw..

[29]  Phyllis G. Frankl,et al.  All-uses vs mutation testing: An experimental comparison of effectiveness , 1997, J. Syst. Softw..

[30]  R.A. DeMillo,et al.  An extended overview of the Mothra software testing environment , 1988, [1988] Proceedings. Second Workshop on Software Testing, Verification, and Analysis.

[31]  Andreas Zeller,et al.  (Un-)Covering Equivalent Mutants , 2010, 2010 Third International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation.

[32]  J. A. Acree On mutation , 1980 .

[33]  A. Jefferson Offutt,et al.  Using compiler optimization techniques to detect equivalent mutants , 1994, Softw. Test. Verification Reliab..