article

Test conditions for fault classes in Boolean specifications

Authors:

Kalpesh Kapoor,

Jonathan P. BowenAuthors Info & Claims

ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM), Volume 16, Issue 3

Pages 10 - es

https://doi.org/10.1145/1243987.1243988

Published: 01 July 2007 Publication History

Abstract

Fault-based testing of software checks the software implementation for a set of faults. Two previous papers on fault-based testing [Kuhn 1999; Tsuchiya and Kikuno 2002] represent the required behavior of the software as a Boolean specification represented in Disjunctive Normal Form (DNF) and then show that faults may be organized in a hierarchy. This article extends these results by identifying necessary and sufficient conditions for fault-based testing. Unlike previous solutions, the formal analysis used to derive these conditions imposes no restrictions (such as DNF) on the form of the Boolean specification.

References

[1]

DeMillo, R. A., Lipton, R. J., and Sayward, F. G. 1978. Hints on test data selection: Help for the practicing programmer. IEEE Computer 11, 4 (April), 34--41.

Digital Library

[2]

DeMillo, R. A. and Offutt, A. J. 1991. Constraint-based automatic test data generation. IEEE Trans. Softw. Engin. 17, 9 (Sept.), 900--910.

Digital Library

[3]

Frankl, P. G. and Weiss, S. N. 1993. An experimental comparison of the effectiveness of branch testing and data flow testing. IEEE Trans. Softw. Engin. 19, 8 (Aug.), 774--787.

Digital Library

[4]

Hierons, R. M. 2002. Comparing test sets and criteria in the presence of test hypotheses and fault domains. ACM Trans. Softw. Engin. Method. 11, 4 (Oct.), 427--448.

Digital Library

[5]

IEEE. 1990. IEEE Standard Glossary of Software Engineering Terminology, ANSI/IEEE Std. 610.12. New York: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.

[6]

Kapoor, K. and Bowen, J. P. 2004. Ordering mutants to minimise test effort in mutation testing. In 4th International Workshop, Formal Approaches to Software Testing (FATES). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3395. Springer-Verlag, 195--209.

Digital Library

[7]

Kapoor, K. and Bowen, J. P. 2005. A formal analysis of MCDC and RCDC test criteria. Softw. Test. Verificat. Reliab. 15, 1 (March), 21--40.

[8]

Kuhn, D. R. 1999. Fault classes and error detection capability of specification-based testing. ACM Trans. Softw. Engin. Method. 8, 4 (Oct.), 411--424.

Digital Library

[9]

Lau, M. F. and Yu, Y. T. 2005. An extended fault class hierarchy for specification-based testing. ACM Trans. Softw. Engin. Method. 14, 3 (July), 247--276.

Digital Library

[10]

Morell, L. J. 1990. A theory of fault-based testing. IEEE Trans. Softw. Engin. 16, 8 (Aug.), 844--857.

Digital Library

[11]

Offutt, A. J. 1992. Investigations of the software testing coupling effect. ACM Trans. Softw. Engin. Method. 1, 1 (Jan.), 5--20.

Digital Library

[12]

Offutt, A. J., Xiong, Y., and Liu, S. 1999. Criteria for generating specification-based tests. In 5th International Conference on Engineering of Complex Computer Systems (ICECCS). IEEE, 119--129.

Digital Library

[13]

Okun, V., Black, P. E., and Yesha, Y. 2004. Comparison of fault classes in specification-based testing. Inform. Softw. Tech. 46, 8 (June), 525--533.

[14]

Paradkar, A., Tai, K. C., and Vouk, M. A. 1996. Automatic test-generation for predicates. IEEE Trans. Reliab. 45, 4 (Dec.), 515--530.

[15]

Richardson, D. J. and Thompson, M. C. 1993. An analysis of test data selection criteria using the RELAY model of fault detection. IEEE Trans. Softw. Engin. 19, 6 (June), 533--553.

Digital Library

[16]

RTCA. 1992. Software Considerations in Airborne Systems and Equipment Certification, DO-178B. Washington DC, USA.

[17]

Tai, K. C. 1996. Theory of fault-based predicate testing for computer programs. IEEE Trans. Softw. Engin. 22, 8 (Aug.), 552--562.

Digital Library

[18]

Tsuchiya, T. and Kikuno, T. 2002. On fault classes and error detection capability of specification-based testing. ACM Trans. Softw. Engin. Method. 11, 1 (Jan.), 58--62.

Digital Library

[19]

Vilkomir, S. A. and Bowen, J. P. 2006. From MC/DC to RC/DC: Formalization and analysis of control-flow testing criteria. Formal Aspects Comput. 18, 1 (Mar.), 42--62.

[20]

Vouk, M. A., Tai, K. C., and Paradkar, A. 1994. Empirical studies of predicate-based software testing. In 5th International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering. IEEE Computer Society, 55--64.

[21]

Wah, K. S. H. T. 2003. An analysis of the coupling effect I: Single test data. Science Comput. Program. 48, 119--161.

Digital Library

[22]

Weyuker, E. J. 2002. Thinking formally about testing without a formal specification. In Formal Approaches to Testing of Software (FATES), A Satellite Workshop of CONCUR'02. 1--10.

[23]

Weyuker, E. J., Goradia, T., and Singh, A. 1994. Automatically generating test data from a Boolean specification. IEEE Trans. Softw. Engin. 20, 5 (May), 353--363.

Digital Library

[24]

Wong, W. E. and Mathur, A. P. 1995. Reducing the cost of mutation testing: An empirical study. J. Syst. Softw. 31, 3 (Dec.), 185--196.

Digital Library

[25]

Zhu, H., Hall, P. A. V., and May, J. H. R. 1997. Software unit test coverage and adequacy. ACM Comput. Surv. 29, 4 (Dec.), 366--427.

Digital Library

Cited By

Wang ZYu MFeng YZhang W(2024)Do we need high-order mutation in fault-based Boolean-specification testing?Journal of Systems and Software10.1016/j.jss.2023.111933210:COnline publication date: 1-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.jss.2023.111933
Barisal SChauhan SDutta AGodboley SSahoo BMohapatra D(2022)BOOMPizer: Minimization and prioritization of CONCOLIC based boosted MC/DC test casesJournal of King Saud University - Computer and Information Sciences10.1016/j.jksuci.2021.12.00734:10(9757-9776)Online publication date: Nov-2022
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jksuci.2021.12.007
Kavzak Ufuktepe DAyav TBelli F(2021)Test input generation from cause–effect graphsSoftware Quality Journal10.1007/s11219-021-09560-329:4(733-782)Online publication date: 1-Dec-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s11219-021-09560-3
Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Automatic generation of test cases from Boolean specifications using the MUMCUT strategy

A recent theoretical study has proved that the MUMCUT testing strategy (1) guarantees to detect seven types of fault in Boolean specifications in irredundant disjunctive normal form, and (2) requires only a subset of the test sets that satisfy the ...
On detecting double literal faults in Boolean expressions
Ada-Europe'07: Proceedings of the 12th international conference on Reliable software technologies

Fault-based testing aims at selecting test cases to detect hypothesized faults in a program.When a program contains a fault so that it behaves differently from as is expected, test cases that satisfy the detection condition of the fault will be able to ...
A new disjunctive literal insertion fault detection strategy in boolean specifications
Abstract
In fault‐based Boolean expression testing, the main challenge is to generate effective test cases that can detect faults within expressions. Previous studies show that it is hard to detect literal insertion faults, more specifically Disjunctive ...

This paper has presented a new test case selection strategy (namely, SFPC), to detect disjunctive literal insertion fault (LIF[+]) in Boolean expressions. The experimental results show that SFPC has detected approximately 97.3% of LIF[+] faulty expressions ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology

ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology Volume 16, Issue 3

July 2007

96 pages

ISSN:1049-331X

EISSN:1557-7392

DOI:10.1145/1243987

Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © 2007 ACM.

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 01 July 2007

Published in TOSEM Volume 16, Issue 3

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Article

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

20
Total Citations
View Citations
851
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)7
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2

Reflects downloads up to 06 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Wang ZYu MFeng YZhang W(2024)Do we need high-order mutation in fault-based Boolean-specification testing?Journal of Systems and Software10.1016/j.jss.2023.111933210:COnline publication date: 1-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.jss.2023.111933
Barisal SChauhan SDutta AGodboley SSahoo BMohapatra D(2022)BOOMPizer: Minimization and prioritization of CONCOLIC based boosted MC/DC test casesJournal of King Saud University - Computer and Information Sciences10.1016/j.jksuci.2021.12.00734:10(9757-9776)Online publication date: Nov-2022
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jksuci.2021.12.007
Kavzak Ufuktepe DAyav TBelli F(2021)Test input generation from cause–effect graphsSoftware Quality Journal10.1007/s11219-021-09560-329:4(733-782)Online publication date: 1-Dec-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s11219-021-09560-3
Bowen JBreuer P(2021)Formal Methods Communities of Practice: A Survey of Personal ExperienceSoftware Engineering and Formal Methods. SEFM 2021 Collocated Workshops10.1007/978-3-031-12429-7_21(287-301)Online publication date: 6-Dec-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-031-12429-7_21
Gong HLi JLi R(2020)CTFTP: A Test Case Generation Strategy for General Boolean Expressions Based on Ordered Binary Label-Driven Petri NetsIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2020.30258258(174516-174529)Online publication date: 2020
https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3025825
Xie WLi QWang KMa CZhang TZhang G(2020)Conditional Expression Fault Classification and Repair Method of Aviation Control SoftwareXibei Gongye Daxue Xuebao/Journal of Northwestern Polytechnical University10.1051/jnwpu/2020384086238:4(862-872)Online publication date: 6-Oct-2020
https://doi.org/10.1051/jnwpu/20203840862
Barisal SKishore PKumar ASahoo BMohapatra D(2020)Measuring MC/DC Coverage and Boolean Fault Severity of Object-Oriented Programs Using Concolic TestingIntelligent and Cloud Computing10.1007/978-981-15-5971-6_38(345-353)Online publication date: 31-Oct-2020
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5971-6_38
Arcaini PGargantini ARiccobene EVavassori P(2017)A novel use of equivalent mutants for static anomaly detection in software artifactsInformation and Software Technology10.1016/j.infsof.2016.01.01981:C(52-64)Online publication date: 1-Jan-2017
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.infsof.2016.01.019
Ayav T(2017)Prioritizing MCDC test cases by spectral analysis of Boolean functionsSoftware Testing, Verification and Reliability10.1002/stvr.164127:7Online publication date: Aug-2017
https://doi.org/10.1002/stvr.1641
Arcaini PGargantini ARiccobene EVavassori P(2015)Rehabilitating equivalent mutants as static anomaly detectors in software artifacts2015 IEEE Eighth International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshops (ICSTW)10.1109/ICSTW.2015.7107452(1-6)Online publication date: Apr-2015
https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSTW.2015.7107452
Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Article

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Issue’s Table of Contents