Advertisement

An Optimized Adaptive Random Partition Software Testing by Using Bacterial Foraging Algorithm

  • K. Devika Rani DhivyaEmail author
  • V. S. Meenakshi
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computational Vision and Biomechanics book series (LNCVB, volume 28)

Abstract

Software testing is a procedure of investigating a software product to find errors. Optimized Adaptive Random Partition Testing (OARPT) is a combined approach which comprises of Adaptive Testing (AT) and Random Partition Testing (RPT) in an alternative manner depending on test case. ARPT consists of two strategies are ARPT 1 and ARPT 2. The parameters of ARPT 1 and ARPT 2 need to be assessed for different software with different number of test cases and programs. The process of assessing the parameters of ARPT consumes high computational overhead and therefore it is more necessary to optimize parameters of ARPT. In this paper, the parameters of ARPT 1 and ARPT 2 are optimized by using Bacterial Foraging Algorithm (BFA) which improves the performance of ARPT software testing strategies. The experiments are conducted in different software and the proposed method improves defect detection efficiency and high code coverage, reduces time consumption and reduces memory utilization.

Keywords

Adaptive random partition testing Adaptive testing Random partition testing Bacterial foraging algorithm 

References

  1. 1.
    Chi, Z., Xuan, J., Ren, Z., Xie, X., Guo, H.: Multi-level random walk for software test suite reduction. IEEE Comput. Intell. Mag. 12(2), 24–33 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Nie, C., Wu, H., Niu, X., Kuo, F.C., Leung, H., Colbourn, C.J.: Combinatorial testing, random testing, and adaptive random testing for detecting interaction triggered failures. Inf. Softw. Technol. 62, 198–213 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zachariah, B.: Analysis of software testing strategies through attained failure size. IEEE Trans. Reliab. 61(2), 569–579 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lv, J., Hu, H., Cai, K.Y., Chen, T.Y.: Adaptive and random partition software testing. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Syst. 44(12), 1649–1664 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Devika Rani Dhivya K.: Improved time performance of adaptive random partition software testing by applying clustering algorithm. In: International Conference on Interdisciplinary Research Innovations in Computer Science, Bioscience (2016, on 29th and 30th)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Schwartz, A., Do, H.: Cost-effective regression testing through Adaptive Test Prioritization strategies. J. Syst. Softw. 115, 61–81 (2016); Bashir, M.B., Nadeem, A.: Improved genetic algorithm to reduce mutation testing cost. IEEE Access (2017)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yong, C., Yong, Z., Tingting, S., Jingyong, L.: Comparison of two fitness functions for ga-based path-oriented test data generation. ICNC’09. Fifth International Conference on Natural computation, 2009, 14–16 Aug 2009, vol. 4, pp. 177–181Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lv, J., Yin, B.B., Cai, K.Y.: On the asymptotic behavior of adaptive testing strategy for software reliability assessment. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 40(4), 396–412 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Huang, R., Liu, H., Xie, X., Chen, J.: Enhancing mirror adaptive random testing through dynamic partitioning. Inf. Softw. Technol. 67, 13–29 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chen, T.Y., Huang, D.H., Zhou, Z.Q.: On adaptive random testing through iterative partitioning. J. Inf. Sci. Eng. 27(4), 1449–1472 (2011)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Shahbazi, A., Tappenden, A.F., Miller, J.: Centroidal voronoi tessellations-a new approach to random testing. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 39(2), 163–183 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chen, T.Y., Poon, P.L., Tang, S.F., Tse, T.H.: DESSERT: a DividE-and-conquer methodology for identifying categorieS, choiceS, and choicE Relations for Test case generation. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 38(4), 794–809 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Devika Rani Dhivya K.: Analysis on generating test case for random testing using optimization technique. In: Second International Conference on Information Technology & Society pp. 200–207. Proceeding of IC-ITS 2015, Meliá Hotel Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia (2015) e-ISBN: 978-967-0850-07-8Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Devika Rani Dhivya K., Meenakshi, V.S.: Weighted particle swarm optimization algorithm for randomized unit testing. In: Electrical, Computer and Communication Technologies (ICECCT), 2015 IEEE International Conference. ICECCT 2015, vol 2, pp. 0828–0834. IEEE Xplore: 2, Coimbatore, 5–7 Mar 2015Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Singh, R.R.: Test suite minimization using evolutionary optimization algorithms: review. Int. J. Eng. Res. Technol. (IJERT) 3(6) (2014, June)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zhang, X., Teng, X., Pham, H.: Considering fault removal efficiency in software reliability assessment. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 33(1), 114–120 (2003, Jan)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cheon, Y., Leavens, G.T.: A simple and practical approach to unit testing: the JML and JUnit way. Computer Science Technical Reports. 181 (2001)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Shenga, Z., Zhang, Y., Zhou, H., He, Q.: Automatic path test data generation based on GA-PSO. In: 2010 IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Computing and Intelligent Systems (ICIS), 29–31 Oct 2010, vol. 1, pp. 142–146Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mai, X., Li, L.: Bacterial foraging algorithm based on gradient particle swarm optimization algorithm. In: 2012 8th International Conference on Natural Computation (2012)Google Scholar
  20. 20.

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG  2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of BCA & M.Sc. (SS), Sri Krishna Arts and Science CollegeBharathiar UniversityCoimbatoreIndia
  2. 2.Department of Computer Science, Chikkanna Government Arts CollegeBharathiar UniversityTirupurIndia

Personalised recommendations