skip to main content
research-article

A revisit of fault class hierarchies in general boolean specifications

Published: 26 August 2011 Publication History

Abstract

Recently, Kapoor and Bowen [2007] have extended the works by Kuhn [1999], Tsuchiya and Kikuno [2002], and Lau and Yu [2005]. However, their proofs overlook the possibility that a mutant of the Boolean specifications under test may be equivalent. Hence, each of their fault relationships is either incorrect or has an incorrect proof. In this article, we give counterexamples to the incorrect fault relationships and provide new proofs for the valid fault relationships. Furthermore, a co-stronger fault relation is introduced to establish a new fault class hierarchy for general Boolean specifications.

References

[1]
Ammann, P., Black, P. E., and Majurski, W. 1998. Using model checking to generate tests from specifications. In Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE International Conference on Formal Engineering Methods (ICFEM'98). IEEE Computer Society, 46--54.
[2]
Chen, T. Y., Lau, M. F., and Yu, Y. T. 1999. MUMCUT: A fault-based strategy for testing Boolean specifications. In Proceedings of Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference (APSEC'99). IEEE Computer Society Press, 606--613.
[3]
Chen, Z. Y., Xu, B. W., and Nie, C. H. 2007. Comparing fault-based testing strategies of general Boolean specifications. In Proceedings of the 31st International Computer Software and Applications Conference (COMPSAC'07). IEEE Computer Society Press, 621--622.
[4]
Chen, Z. Y., Xu, B. W., and Nie, C. H. 2008. A detectability analysis of fault classes for Boolean specifications. In Proceedings of the 23rd Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (SAC'08). ACM Press, 826--830.
[5]
Demillo, R. A., Lipton, R. J., and Sayward, F. G. 1978. Hints on test data selection: Help for the practicing programmer. Computer 11, 4, 34--41.
[6]
Foster, K. A. 1984. Sensitive test data for logic expressions. ACM SIGSOFT Softw. Engin. Notes 9, 2, 120--125.
[7]
Gargantini, A. 2007. Using model checking to generate fault detecting tests. In Proceedings of Test and Proof (TAP'07). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4454. Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg, 189--206.
[8]
Kaminski, G., Williams, G., and Ammann, P. 2008. Reconciling perspectives of software logic testing. Softw. Test. Verif. Reliab. 18, 3, 149--188.
[9]
Kapoor, K. and Bowen, J. 2007. Test conditions for fault classes in Boolean specifications. ACM Trans. Softw. Engin. Method. 16, 3, 1--12.
[10]
Kobayashi, N., Tsuchiya, T., and Kikuno, T. 2002. Non-specification-based approaches to logic testing for software. Inform. Softw. Tech. 44, 113--121.
[11]
Kuhn, D. R. 1999. Fault classes and error detection capability of specification-based testing. ACM Trans. Softw. Engin. Method. 8, 4, 411--424.
[12]
Lau, M. F. and Yu, Y. T. 2005. An extended fault class hierarchy for specification-based testing. ACM Trans. Softw. Engin. Method. 14, 3, 247--276.
[13]
Morell, L. J. 1990. A theory of fault-based testing. IEEE Trans. Softw. Engin. 16, 8, 844--857.
[14]
Offutt, A. J., Liu, S., Abdurazik, A., and Ammann, P. 2003. Generating test data from state-based specifications. Softw. Test. Verif. Reliab. 13, 1, 25--53.
[15]
Okun, V., Black, P. E., and Yesha, Y. 2004. Comparison of fault classes in specification-based testing. Inform. Softw. Tech. 46, 8, 525--533.
[16]
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, 533--553.
[17]
Stamelos, I. 2003. Detecting associative shift faults in predicate testing. J. Syst. Softw. 66, 57--63.
[18]
Tai, K. C., Vouk, M. A., Paradkar, A., and Lu, P. 1994. Evaluation of a predicate-based software testing strategy. IBM Syst. J. 33, 3, 445--457.
[19]
Tsuchiya, T. and Kikuno, T. 2002. On fault classes and error detection capability of specification-based testing. ACM Trans. Softw. Engin. Method. 11, 1, 58--62.
[20]
Weyuker, E., Goradia, T., and Singh, A. 1994. Automatically generating test data from a Boolean specification. IEEE Trans. Softw. Engin. 20, 5, 353--363.

Cited By

View all
  • (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
  • (2021)Comparing Fault Detection Efficiencies of Adaptive Random Testing and Greedy Combinatorial Testing for Boolean-SpecificationsInternational Journal of Performability Engineering10.23940/ijpe.21.01.p11.11412217:1(114)Online publication date: 2021
  • (2021)A Comparison of Fault Detection Efficiency Between Adaptive Random Testing and Greedy Combinatorial Testing for Control Logics in Nuclear Industrial Distributed Control SystemsIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2021.30871659(84021-84033)Online publication date: 2021
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology
ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology  Volume 20, Issue 3
August 2011
176 pages
ISSN:1049-331X
EISSN:1557-7392
DOI:10.1145/2000791
Issue’s Table of Contents
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 26 August 2011
Accepted: 01 July 2009
Revised: 01 July 2009
Received: 01 April 2009
Published in TOSEM Volume 20, Issue 3

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Boolean specifications
  2. Fault-based testing
  3. fault class

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Research
  • Refereed

Funding Sources

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)5
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 14 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (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
  • (2021)Comparing Fault Detection Efficiencies of Adaptive Random Testing and Greedy Combinatorial Testing for Boolean-SpecificationsInternational Journal of Performability Engineering10.23940/ijpe.21.01.p11.11412217:1(114)Online publication date: 2021
  • (2021)A Comparison of Fault Detection Efficiency Between Adaptive Random Testing and Greedy Combinatorial Testing for Control Logics in Nuclear Industrial Distributed Control SystemsIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2021.30871659(84021-84033)Online publication date: 2021
  • (2021)Test input generation from cause–effect graphsSoftware Quality Journal10.1007/s11219-021-09560-3Online publication date: 18-Jun-2021
  • (2021)A new disjunctive literal insertion fault detection strategy in boolean specificationsJournal of Software: Evolution and Process10.1002/smr.233633:5Online publication date: 26-Apr-2021
  • (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
  • (2019)Comparing Minimal Failure-Causing Schema and Probabilistic Failure-Causing Schema on Boolean SpecificationsInternational Journal of Performability Engineering10.23940/ijpe.19.10.p17.2709271715:10(2709)Online publication date: 2019
  • (2017)Prioritizing MCDC test cases by spectral analysis of Boolean functionsSoftware Testing, Verification and Reliability10.1002/stvr.164127:7Online publication date: Aug-2017
  • (2016)Combinatorial Testing of Software with Binary Inputs: A State-of-the-Art Review2016 IEEE International Conference on Software Quality, Reliability and Security Companion (QRS-C)10.1109/QRS-C.2016.12(55-60)Online publication date: Aug-2016
  • (2016)Process time patternsInformation Systems10.1016/j.is.2015.10.00257:C(38-68)Online publication date: 1-Apr-2016
  • Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

Full Access

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media