Editorial: Who Is An Author?

This issue contains three papers that invent new ideas and evaluated them empirically. The first paper, Directed test suite augmentation: An empirical investigation, by Xu, Kim, Kim, Cohen, and Rothermel, empirically investigates the effectiveness of strategies for augmenting test sets after changes to software. They compared two different test generation algorithms in two separate studies. (Recommended by Paul Ammann.) The second paper, Reducing execution profiles: Techniques and benefits, by Farjo, Assi, and Masri, presents results of analysis of execution profiles. They invented six ways to reduce the size of execution profiles and empirically measured the effect on the quality of analysis after reducing the profiles. (Recommended by T.Y. Chen.) The third paper, Automated metamorphic testing of variability analysis tools, by Segura, Durán, Sánchez, Le Berre, Lonca, and Ruiz-Cortés, invent a technique for solving the oracle problem when testing tools that analyze the variability of software. (Recommended by T.H. Tse.) Combined, these three papers have a whopping 14 co-authors, which leads in perfectly to the subject of this editorial: determining authorship.