skip to main content
10.1145/3194733.3194739acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Test suite reduction for self-organizing systems: a mutation-based approach

Published:28 May 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

We study regression testing and test suite reduction for self-organizing (SO) systems. The complex environments of SO systems typically require large test suites. The physical distribution of their components and their history-dependent behavior, however, make test execution very expensive. Consequently, an efficient test suite reduction mechanism is needed. The fundamental characteristic of SO systems is their ability to reconfigure themselves. We thus investigate a mutation-based approach concentrating on reconfigurations, more specifically the communication between the distributed components in reconfigurations. Due to distribution, we argue for an explicit consideration of higher-order mutants and find a short-cut that makes the number of test cases to execute before reduction feasible. For the reduction task, we evaluate the applicability of two existing clustering techniques, Affinity Propagation and Dissimilarity-based Sparse Subset Selection. It turns out that these techniques are able to drastically reduce the original test suite while retaining a good mutation score. We discuss the approach by means of a test suite for a self-organizing production cell as a running example.

References

  1. Laura Balzano, Robert Nowak, and Waheed Bajwa. 2010. Column subset selection with missing data. In NIPS workshop on low-rank methods for large-scale machine learning, Vol. 1. Citeseer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Jennifer Black, Emanuel Melachrinoudis, and David Kaeli. 2004. Bi-criteria models for all-uses test suite reduction. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Software Engineering. IEEE Computer Society, 106--115. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Christos Boutsidis, Michael W Mahoney, and Petros Drineas. 2009. An improved approximation algorithm for the column subset selection problem. In Proceedings of the twentieth annual ACM-SIAM symposium on Discrete algorithms. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, 968--977. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Rogério de Lemos et al. 2013. Software Engineering for Self-Adaptive Systems: A Second Research Roadmap. In Software Engineering for Self-Adaptive Systems II, Rogério de Lemos, Holger Giese, Hausi A. Müller, and Mary Shaw (Eds.). LNCS, Vol. 7475. Springer, 1--32.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Richard A DeMillo, Richard J Lipton, and Frederick G Sayward. 1978. Hints on test data selection: Help for the practicing programmer. Computer 11, 4 (1978), 34--41. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Benedikt Eberhardinger, Gerrit Anders, Hella Seebach, Florian Siefert, Alexander Knapp, and Wolfgang Reif. 2017. An approach for isolated testing of self-organization algorithms. In Software Engineering for Self-Adaptive Systems III. Assurances. Springer, 188--222.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Benedikt Eberhardinger, Axel Habermaier, Hella Seebach, and Wolfgang Reif. 2016. Back-to-back testing of self-organization mechanisms. In IFIP International Conference on Testing Software and Systems. Springer, 18--35.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Benedikt Eberhardinger, Hella Seebach, Dominik Klumpp, and Wolfgang Reif. 2017. Test Case Selection Strategy for Self-Organization Mechanisms. In Test, Analyse und Verifikation von Software - gestern, heute, morgen. dpunkt, 139--157.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Ehsan Elhamifar, Guillermo Sapiro, and S Shankar Sastry. 2016. Dissimilarity-based sparse subset selection. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence 38, 11 (2016), 2182--2197. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Ehsan Elhamifar, Guillermo Sapiro, and Rene Vidal. 2012. Finding exemplars from pairwise dissimilarities via simultaneous sparse recovery. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 19--27. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Stephanie Forrest. 1990. Emergent computation: Self-organizing, collective, and cooperative phenomena in natural and artificial computing networks. Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena 42, 1 (1990), 1--11. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Gordon Fraser and Franz Wotawa. 2007. Redundancy based test-suite reduction. In International Conference on Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering. Springer, 291--305. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Brendan J Frey and Delbert Dueck. 2007. Clustering by passing messages between data points. science 315, 5814 (2007), 972--976.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Richard W Hamming. 1950. Error detecting and error correcting codes. Bell Labs Technical Journal 29, 2 (1950), 147--160.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Yue Jia and Mark Harman. 2008. Constructing subtle faults using higher order mutation testing. In Source Code Analysis and Manipulation, 2008 Eighth IEEE International Working Conference on. IEEE, 249--258.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. James A Jones and Mary Jean Harrold. 2003. Test-suite reduction and prioritization for modified condition/decision coverage. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 29, 3 (2003), 195--209. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Leonard Kaufman and Peter Rousseeuw. 1987. Clustering by means of medoids. North-Holland.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. A. Jefferson Offutt. 1989. The coupling effect: fact or fiction. In ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, Vol. 14. ACM, 131--140. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. A. Jefferson Offutt, Jie Pan, and Jeffrey M. Voas. 1995. Procedures for reducing the size of coverage-based test sets. In Proceedings of International Conference on Testing Computer Software.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. André Reichstaller, Benedikt Eberhardinger, Alexander Knapp, Wolfgang Reif, and Marcel Gehlen. 2016. Risk-based interoperability testing using reinforcement learning. In IFIP International Conference on Testing Software and Systems. Springer, 52--69.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Urban Richter, Moez Mnif, Jürgen Branke, Christian Müller-Schloer, and Hartmut Schmeck. 2006. Towards a generic observer/controller architecture for Organic Computing. GI Jahrestagung (1) 93 (2006), 112--119.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Gregg Rothermel, Mary Jean Harrold, Jeffery Von Ronne, and Christie Hong. 2002. Empirical studies of test-suite reduction. Software Testing, Verification and Reliability 12, 4 (2002), 219--249.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Gregg Rothermel, Roland H. Untch, Chengyun Chu, and Mary Jean Harrold. 2001. Prioritizing test cases for regression testing. IEEE Transactions on software engineering 27, 10 (2001), 929--948. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. August Shi, Alex Gyori, Milos Gligoric, Andrey Zaytsev, and Darko Marinov. 2014. Balancing trade-offs in test-suite reduction. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering. ACM, 246--256. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Joel A Tropp. 2009. Column subset selection, matrix factorization, and eigenvalue optimization. In Proceedings of the Twentieth Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, 978--986. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Lingming Zhang, Darko Marinov, Lu Zhang, and Sarfraz Khurshid. 2011. An empirical study of JUnit test-suite reduction. In Software Reliability Engineering (ISSRE), 2011 IEEE 22nd International Symposium on. IEEE, 170--179. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Conferences
    AST '18: Proceedings of the 13th International Workshop on Automation of Software Test
    May 2018
    85 pages
    ISBN:9781450357432
    DOI:10.1145/3194733

    Copyright © 2018 ACM

    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 the author(s) 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: 28 May 2018

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article

    Upcoming Conference

    ICSE 2025

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader