Advertisement

A Bi-objective Model Inspired Greedy Algorithm for Test Suite Minimization

  • Saeed Parsa
  • Alireza Khalilian
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5899)

Abstract

Regression testing is a critical activity which occurs during the maintenance stage of the software lifecycle. However, it requires large amounts of test cases to assure the attainment of a certain degree of quality. As a result, test suite sizes may grow significantly. To address this issue, Test Suite Reduction techniques have been proposed. However, suite size reduction may lead to significant loss of fault detection efficacy. To deal with this problem, a greedy algorithm is presented in this paper. This algorithm attempts to select a test case which satisfies the maximum number of testing requirements while having minimum overlap in requirements coverage with other test cases. In order to evaluate the proposed algorithm, experiments have been conducted on the Siemens suite and the Space program. The results demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed algorithm by retaining the fault detection capability of the suites while achieving significant suite size reduction.

Keywords

Software regression testing testing criteria test suite minimization test suite reduction fault detection effectiveness 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Rothermel, G., Harrold, M.J., von Ronne, J., Hong, C.: Empirical Studies of Test-Suite Reduction. Journal of Software Testing, Verification, and Reliability 12(4), 219–249 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rothermel, G., Harrold, M.J., Ostrin, J., Hong, C.: An Empirical Study of the Effects of Minimization on the Fault Detection Capabilities of Test Suites. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Maintenance. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (1998)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Harrold, M.J., Gupta, R., Soffa, M.L.: A methodology for controlling the size of a test suite. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 2, 270–285 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chen, T.Y., Lau, M.F.: Heuristics toward the Optimization of the Size of a Test Suite. In: Proc. 3rd Int’l. Conf. on Softw. Quality Management, Seville, Spain, April 1995, vol. 2, pp. 415–424 (1995)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jones, J.A., Harrold, M.J.: Test-Suite Reduction and Prioritization for Modified Condition/Decision Coverage. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 29, 195–209 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    McMaster, S., Memon, A.: Call-Stack Coverage for GUI Test Suite Reduction. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 34, 99–115 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tallam, S., Gupta, N.: A concept analysis inspired greedy algorithm for test suite minimization. In: Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGSOFT workshop on Program analysis for software tools and engineering. ACM, Lisbon (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Leon, D., Podgurski, A.: A Comparison of Coverage-Based and Distribution-Based Techniques for Filtering and Prioritizing Test Cases. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chen, Z., Xu, B., Zhang, X., Nie, C.: A novel approach for test suite reduction based on requirement relation contraction. In: Proceedings of the 2008 ACM symposium on applied computing. ACM, Fortaleza (2008)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zhong, H., Zhang, L., Mei, H.: An experimental study of four typical test suite reduction techniques. Inf. Softw. Technol. 50, 534–546 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chen, T.Y., Lau, M.: A new heuristic for test suite reduction. Information and Software Technology 40(5-6) (1998)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wong, W.E., Horgan, J.R., London, S., Mathur, A.P.: Effect of test set minimization on fault detection effectiveness. Softw. Pract. Exper. 28, 347–369 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mansour, N., El-Fakih, K.: Simulated annealing and genetic algorithms for optimal regression testing. Journal of Software Maintenance 11, 19–34 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Black, J., Melachrinoudis, E., Kaeli, D.: Bi-Criteria Models for All-Uses Test Suite Reduction. In: Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Software Engineering. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2004)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rothermel, G., Elbaum, S., Kinneer, A., Do, H.: Software-artifact infrastructure repository, http://www.cse.unl.edu/~galileo/sir
  16. 16.
    SAS 9.1.3 Documentation, SAS/GRAPH 9.1 Reference, http://support.sas.com/documentation/onlinedoc/91pdf/index_913.html
  17. 17.
    Freund, J.E.: Mathematical Statistics, 5th edn. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1992)zbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Saeed Parsa
    • 1
  • Alireza Khalilian
    • 1
  1. 1.Iran University of Science and TechnologyTehranIran

Personalised recommendations