Gregg Rothermel

Prioritizing test cases for regression testing

Test case prioritization techniques schedule test cases for execution in an order that attempts to increase their effectiveness at meeting some performance goal. Various goals are possible; one involves rate of fault detection, a measure of how quickly faults are detected within the testing process. An improved rate of fault detection during testing can provide faster feedback on the system under test and let software engineers begin correcting faults earlier than might otherwise be possible. One application of prioritization techniques involves regression testing, the retesting of software following modifications; in this context, prioritization techniques can take advantage of information gathered about the previous execution of test cases to obtain test case orderings. We describe several techniques for using test execution information to prioritize test cases for regression testing, including: 1) techniques that order test cases based on their total coverage of code components; 2) techniques that order test cases based on their coverage of code components not previously covered; and 3) techniques that order test cases based on their estimated ability to reveal faults in the code components that they cover. We report the results of several experiments in which we applied these techniques to various test suites for various programs and measured the rates of fault detection achieved by the prioritized test suites, comparing those rates to the rates achieved by untreated, randomly ordered, and optimally ordered suites.

Supporting Controlled Experimentation with Testing Techniques: An Infrastructure and its Potential Impact

Where the creation, understanding, and assessment of software testing and regression testing techniques are concerned, controlled experimentation is an indispensable research methodology. Obtaining the infrastructure necessary to support such experimentation, however, is difficult and expensive. As a result, progress in experimentation with testing techniques has been slow, and empirical data on the costs and effectiveness of techniques remains relatively scarce. To help address this problem, we have been designing and constructing infrastructure to support controlled experimentation with testing and regression testing techniques. This paper reports on the challenges faced by researchers experimenting with testing techniques, including those that inform the design of our infrastructure. The paper then describes the infrastructure that we are creating in response to these challenges, and that we are now making available to other researchers, and discusses the impact that this infrastructure has had and can be expected to have.

Test case prioritization: a family of empirical studies

To reduce the cost of regression testing, software testers may prioritize their test cases so that those which are more important, by some measure, are run earlier in the regression testing process. One potential goal of such prioritization is to increase a test suites rate of fault detection. Previous work reported results of studies that showed that prioritization techniques can significantly improve rate of fault detection. Those studies, however, raised several additional questions: 1) Can prioritization techniques be effective when targeted at specific modified versions; 2) what trade-offs exist between fine granularity and coarse granularity prioritization techniques; 3) can the incorporation of measures of fault proneness into prioritization techniques improve their effectiveness? To address these questions, we have performed several new studies in which we empirically compared prioritization techniques using both controlled experiments and case studies.

Analyzing regression test selection techniques

Regression testing is a necessary but expensive maintenance activity aimed at showing that code has not been adversely affected by changes. Regression test selection techniques reuse tests from an existing test suite to test a modified program. Many regression test selection techniques have been proposed, however, it is difficult to compare and evaluate these techniques because they have different goals. This paper outlines the issues relevant to regression test selection techniques, and uses these issues as the basis for a framework within which to evaluate the techniques. The paper illustrates the application of the framework by using it to evaluate existing regression test selection techniques. The evaluation reveals the strengths and weaknesses of existing techniques, and highlights some problems that future work in this area should address.

A safe, efficient regression test selection technique

Regression testing is an expensive but necessary maintenance activity performed on modified software to provide confidence that changes are correct and do not adversely affect other portions of the softwore. A regression test selection technique choses, from an existing test set, thests that are deemed necessary to validate modified software. We present a new technique for regression test selection. Our algorithms construct control flow graphs for a precedure or program and its modified version and use these graphs to select tests that execute changed code from the original test suite. We prove that, under certain conditions, the set of tests our technique selects includes every test from the original test suite that con expose faults in the modified procedfdure or program. Under these conditions our algorithms are safe. Moreover, although our algorithms may select some tests that cannot expose faults, they are at lease as precise as other safe regression test selection algorithms. Unlike many other regression test selection algorithms, our algorithms handle all language constructs and all types of program modifications. We have implemented our algorithms; initial empirical studies indicate that our technique can significantly reduce the cost of regression testing modified software.

An experimental determination of sufficient mutant operators

Mutation testing is a technique for unit-testing software that, although powerful, is computationally expensive, The principal expense of mutation is that many variants of the test program, called mutants, must be repeatedly executed. This article quantifies the expense of mutation in terms of the number of mutants that are created, then proposes and evaluates a technique that reduces the number of mutants by an order of magnitude. Selective mutation reduces. the cost of mutation testing by reducing the number of mutants, This article reports experimental results that compare selective mutation testing with standard, or nonselective, mutation testing, and results that quantify the savings achieved by selective mutation testing, The results support the hypothesis that selective mutation is almost as strong as nonselective mutation: in experimental trials selective mutation provides almost the same coverage as nonselective mutation. with a four-fold or more reduction in the number of mutants.

Test case prioritization: an empirical study

Test case prioritization techniques schedule test cases for execution in an order that attempts to maximize some objective function. A variety of objective functions are applicable; one such function involves rate of fault detection-a measure of how quickly faults are detected within the testing process. An improved rate of fault detection during regression testing can provide faster feedback on a system under regression test and let debuggers begin their work earlier than might otherwise be possible. In this paper we describe several techniques for prioritizing test cases and report our empirical results measuring the effectiveness of these techniques for improving rate of fault detection. The results provide insights into the tradeoffs among various techniques for test case prioritization.

The state of the art in end-user software engineering

Most programs today are written not by professional software developers, but by people with expertise in other domains working towards goals for which they need computational support. For example, a teacher might write a grading spreadsheet to save time grading, or an interaction designer might use an interface builder to test some user interface design ideas. Although these end-user programmers may not have the same goals as professional developers, they do face many of the same software engineering challenges, including understanding their requirements, as well as making decisions about design, reuse, integration, testing, and debugging. This article summarizes and classifies research on these activities, defining the area of End-User Software Engineering (EUSE) and related terminology. The article then discusses empirical research about end-user software engineering activities and the technologies designed to support them. The article also addresses several crosscutting issues in the design of EUSE tools, including the roles of risk, reward, and domain complexity, and self-efficacy in the design of EUSE tools and the potential of educating users about software engineering principles.

An empirical study of the effects of minimization on the fault detection capabilities of test suites

Test suite minimization techniques attempt to reduce the cost of saving and reusing tests during software maintenance, by eliminating redundant tests from test suites. A potential drawback of these techniques is that in minimizing a test suite, they might reduce the ability of that test suite to reveal faults in the software. A study showed that minimization can reduce test suite size without significantly reducing the fault detection capabilities of test suites. To further investigate this issue, we performed an experiment in which we compared the costs and benefits of minimizing test suites of various sizes for several programs. In contrast to the previous study, our results reveal that the fault detection capabilities of test suites can be severely compromised by minimization.

Incorporating varying test costs and fault severities into test case prioritization

Test case prioritization techniques schedule test cases for regression testing in an order that increases their ability to meet some performance goal. One performance goal, rate of fault detection, measures how quickly faults are detected within the testing process. In previous work (S. Elbaum et al., 2000; G. Rothermel et al., 1999), we provided a metric, APFD, for measuring rate of fault detection, and techniques for prioritizing test cases to improve APFD, and reported the results of experiments using those techniques. This metric and these techniques, however, applied only in cases in which test costs and fault severity are uniform. We present a new metric for assessing the rate of fault detection of prioritized test cases that incorporates varying test case and fault costs. We present the results of a case study illustrating the application of the metric. This study raises several practical questions that might arise in applying test case prioritization; we discuss how practitioners could go about answering these questions.