A Systematic Evaluation of Problematic Tests Generated by EvoSuite

Zhiyu Fan
{"title":"A Systematic Evaluation of Problematic Tests Generated by EvoSuite","authors":"Zhiyu Fan","doi":"10.1109/ICSE-Companion.2019.00068","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"With the rapidly growing scale of modern software, the reliability of software systems has become essential. To ease the developers' pressure of writing unit tests manually, test generation tools such as EvoSuite and Randoop were proposed. Although these approaches have been shown to be able to automatically generate tests for achieving high coverage, the generated tests may be ineffective in detecting real faults. Particularly, these automatically generated tests may suffer from several problems (we call them problematic tests): (1) incorrect oracle. (2) unexpected exception/error. (3) flaky test. We present a comprehensive study of EvoSuite in Defects4j, and performed a detailed analysis of the reasons behind these automatically generated problematic tests. Our analysis identifies 528 problematic tests: 208 (39.4%) of them are caused by incorrect oracle, 319 (60.4%) are caused by unexpected exception/error, and one flaky test.","PeriodicalId":273100,"journal":{"name":"2019 IEEE/ACM 41st International Conference on Software Engineering: Companion Proceedings (ICSE-Companion)","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2019 IEEE/ACM 41st International Conference on Software Engineering: Companion Proceedings (ICSE-Companion)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSE-Companion.2019.00068","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

With the rapidly growing scale of modern software, the reliability of software systems has become essential. To ease the developers' pressure of writing unit tests manually, test generation tools such as EvoSuite and Randoop were proposed. Although these approaches have been shown to be able to automatically generate tests for achieving high coverage, the generated tests may be ineffective in detecting real faults. Particularly, these automatically generated tests may suffer from several problems (we call them problematic tests): (1) incorrect oracle. (2) unexpected exception/error. (3) flaky test. We present a comprehensive study of EvoSuite in Defects4j, and performed a detailed analysis of the reasons behind these automatically generated problematic tests. Our analysis identifies 528 problematic tests: 208 (39.4%) of them are caused by incorrect oracle, 319 (60.4%) are caused by unexpected exception/error, and one flaky test.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对EvoSuite生成的问题测试进行系统评估
随着现代软件规模的迅速增长,软件系统的可靠性变得至关重要。为了减轻开发人员手工编写单元测试的压力,开发人员提出了EvoSuite和Randoop等测试生成工具。尽管这些方法已经被证明能够自动生成测试以获得高覆盖率,但是生成的测试在检测真正的故障时可能是无效的。特别是,这些自动生成的测试可能会遇到几个问题(我们称之为有问题的测试):(1)不正确的oracle。(2)意外异常/错误。(3)片状试验。我们在缺陷4j中对EvoSuite进行了全面的研究,并对这些自动生成的问题测试背后的原因进行了详细的分析。我们的分析确定了528个有问题的测试:其中208个(39.4%)是由不正确的oracle引起的,319个(60.4%)是由意外异常/错误引起的,还有一个零散的测试。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
On the Deterioration of Learning-Based Malware Detectors for Android Quantifying Patterns and Programming Strategies in Block-Based Programming Environments A Data-Driven Security Game to Facilitate Information Security Education Toward Detection and Characterization of Variability Bugs in Configurable C Software: An Empirical Study Mimicking User Behavior to Improve In-House Test Suites
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1