skip to main content
10.1145/3597503.3623344acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Deeply Reinforcing Android GUI Testing with Deep Reinforcement Learning

Authors Info & Claims
Published:06 February 2024Publication History

ABSTRACT

As the scale and complexity of Android applications continue to grow in response to increasing market and user demands, quality assurance challenges become more significant. While previous studies have demonstrated the superiority of Reinforcement Learning (RL) in Android GUI testing, its effectiveness remains limited, particularly in large, complex apps. This limitation arises from the ineffectiveness of Tabular RL in learning the knowledge within the large state-action space of the App Under Test (AUT) and from the suboptimal utilization of the acquired knowledge when employing more advanced RL techniques. To address such limitations, this paper presents DQT, a novel automated Android GUI testing approach based on deep reinforcement learning. DQT preserves widgets' structural and semantic information with graph embedding techniques, building a robust foundation for identifying similar states or actions and distinguishing different ones. Moreover, a specially designed Deep Q-Network (DQN) effectively guides curiosity-driven exploration by learning testing knowledge from runtime interactions with the AUT and sharing it across states or actions. Experiments conducted on 30 diverse open-source apps demonstrate that DQT outperforms existing state-of-the-art testing approaches in both code coverage and fault detection, particularly for large, complex apps. The faults detected by DQT have been reproduced and reported to developers; so far, 21 of the reported issues have been explicitly confirmed, and 14 have been fixed.

References

  1. 42matters. 2023. 42matters: Google Play Statistics and Trends 2023. Retrieved February 27, 2023 from https://42matters.com/google-play-statistics-and-trendsGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Domenico Amalfitano, Anna Rita Fasolino, Porfirio Tramontana, Salvatore De Carmine, and Atif M. Memon. 2012. Using GUI ripping for automated testing of Android applications. In IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, ASE'12, Essen, Germany, September 3--7, 2012. ACM, 258--261.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Domenico Amalfitano, Anna Rita Fasolino, Porfirio Tramontana, Bryan Dzung Ta, and Atif M. Memon. 2015. MobiGUITAR: Automated Model-Based Testing of Mobile Apps. IEEE Softw. 32, 5 (2015), 53--59.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Saswat Anand, Mayur Naik, Mary Jean Harrold, and Hongseok Yang. 2012. Automated concolic testing of smartphone apps. In 20th ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering (FSE-20), SIGSOFT/FSE'12, Cary, NC, USA - November 11 -- 16, 2012. ACM, 59.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Young Min Baek and Doo-Hwan Bae. 2016. Automated model-based Android GUI testing using multi-level GUI comparison criteria. In Proceedings of the 31st IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, ASE 2016, Singapore, September 3--7, 2016. ACM, 238--249.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Yunsheng Bai, Hao Ding, Yang Qiao, Agustin Marinovic, Ken Gu, Ting Chen, Yizhou Sun, and Wei Wang. 2019. Unsupervised Inductive Graph-Level Representation Learning via Graph-Graph Proximity. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 2019, Macao, China, August 10--16, 2019. ijcai.org, 1988--1994.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Farnaz Behrang and Alessandro Orso. 2020. Seven Reasons Why: An In-Depth Study of the Limitations of Random Test Input Generation for Android. In 35th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, ASE 2020, Melbourne, Australia, September 21--25, 2020. IEEE, 1066--1077.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Marc G. Bellemare, Will Dabney, and Rémi Munos. 2017. A Distributional Perspective on Reinforcement Learning. In Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Machine Learning, ICML 2017, Sydney, NSW, Australia, 6--11 August 2017 (Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, Vol. 70). PMLR, 449--458.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Nicolò Cesa-Bianchi, Claudio Gentile, Gergely Neu, and Gábor Lugosi. 2017. Boltzmann Exploration Done Right. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2017, December 4--9, 2017, Long Beach, CA, USA. 6284--6293.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Hsin-Pai Cheng, Tunhou Zhang, Yixing Zhang, Shiyu Li, Feng Liang, Feng Yan, Meng Li, Vikas Chandra, Hai Li, and Yiran Chen. 2021. NASGEM: Neural Architecture Search via Graph Embedding Method. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 35. 7090--7098.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Shauvik Roy Choudhary, Alessandra Gorla, and Alessandro Orso. 2015. Automated Test Input Generation for Android: Are We There Yet? (E). In 30th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, ASE 2015, Lincoln, NE, USA, November 9--13, 2015. IEEE Computer Society, 429--440.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Eliane F. Collins, Arilo Claudio Dias-Neto, Auri Vincenzi, and José Carlos Maldonado. 2021. Deep Reinforcement Learning based Android Application GUI Testing. In 35th Brazilian Symposium on Software Engineering, SBES 2021, Joinville, Santa Catarina, Brazil, 27 September 2021 -- 1 October 2021. ACM, 186--194.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Albert Danial. 2021. cloc: v1.92. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Faraz Yazdani Banafshe Daragh and Sam Malek. 2021. Deep GUI: Black-box GUI Input Generation with Deep Learning. In 36th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, ASE 2021, Melbourne, Australia, November 15--19, 2021. IEEE, 905--916.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Zhen Dong, Marcel Böhme, Lucia Cojocaru, and Abhik Roychoudhury. 2020. Time-travel testing of Android apps. In ICSE '20: 42nd International Conference on Software Engineering, Seoul, South Korea, 27 June - 19 July, 2020. ACM, 481--492.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. EclEmma. 2022. JaCoCo Java Code Coverage Library. Retrieved May 21, 2022 from https://www.eclemma.org/jacoco/index.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Meire Fortunato, Mohammad Gheshlaghi Azar, Bilal Piot, Jacob Menick, Matteo Hessel, Ian Osband, Alex Graves, Volodymyr Mnih, Rémi Munos, Demis Hassabis, Olivier Pietquin, Charles Blundell, and Shane Legg. 2018. Noisy Networks For Exploration. In 6th International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2018, Vancouver, BC, Canada, April 30 -- May 3, 2018, Conference Track Proceedings. OpenReview.net.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Xiang Gao, Shin Hwei Tan, Zhen Dong, and Abhik Roychoudhury. 2018. Android testing via synthetic symbolic execution. In Proceedings of the 33rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, ASE 2018, Montpellier, France, September 3--7, 2018. ACM, 419--429.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Google. 2021. Google Play. Retrieved December 12, 2021 from https://play.google.com/store/appsGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Google. 2021. Run apps on the Android Emulator. Retrieved December 14, 2021 from https://developer.android.com/studio/run/emulatorGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Google. 2021. Sign-in on Android devices running Android 2.3.7 or lower will not be allowed starting September 27. Retrieved June 27, 2023 from https://support.google.com/android/thread/118703101/sign-in-on-android-devices-running-android-2-3-7-or-lower-will-not-be-allowed-starting-september-27Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Google. 2022. AAPT2. Retrieved January 3, 2023 from https://developer.android.com/studio/command-line/aapt2Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Google. 2022. Crashes. Retrieved November 10, 2022 from https://developer.android.com/topic/performance/vitals/crashGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Google. 2022. Fundamentals of testing Android apps. Retrieved May 5, 2022 from https://42matters.com/google-play-statistics-and-trendsGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Google. 2022. Logcat command-line tool. Retrieved January 3, 2023 from https://developer.android.com/studio/command-line/logcatGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Google. 2022. UI/Application Exerciser Monkey. Retrieved April 25, 2022 from https://developer.android.com/studio/test/other-testing-tools/monkeyGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Google. 2022. Write automated tests with UI Automator. Retrieved August 9, 2022 from https://developer.android.com/training/testing/other-components/ui-automatorGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Google. 2023. Android Debug Bridge (adb). Retrieved January 7, 2023 from https://developer.android.com/studio/command-line/adbGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Google. 2023. ANRs. Retrieved February 14, 2023 from https://developer.android.com/topic/performance/vitals/anrGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Tianxiao Gu, Chengnian Sun, Xiaoxing Ma, Chun Cao, Chang Xu, Yuan Yao, Qirun Zhang, Jian Lu, and Zhendong Su. 2019. Practical GUI testing of Android applications via model abstraction and refinement. In Proceedings of the 41st International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE 2019, Montreal, QC, Canada, May 25--31, 2019. IEEE / ACM, 269--280.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Kaiming He and Jian Sun. 2015. Convolutional neural networks at constrained time cost. In IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, CVPR 2015, Boston, MA, USA, June 7--12, 2015. IEEE Computer Society, 5353--5360.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. Xiaocong He, Yuanyuan Zou, Qian Jin, Xu Jingjie, and Xia Mingyuan. 2020. Python wrapper of Android uiautomator test tool. Retrieved October 25, 2021 from https://github.com/xiaocong/uiautomatorGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Matteo Hessel, Joseph Modayil, Hado van Hasselt, Tom Schaul, Georg Ostrovski, Will Dabney, Dan Horgan, Bilal Piot, Mohammad Gheshlaghi Azar, and David Silver. 2018. Rainbow: Combining Improvements in Deep Reinforcement Learning. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence, Vol. 32. 3215--3222.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Gang Hu, Linjie Zhu, and Junfeng Yang. 2018. AppFlow: using machine learning to synthesize robust, reusable UI tests. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM Joint Meeting on European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering, ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE 2018, Lake Buena Vista, FL, USA, November 04--09, 2018. ACM, 269--282.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Gao Huang, Zhuang Liu, Laurens van der Maaten, and Kilian Q. Weinberger. 2017. Densely Connected Convolutional Networks. In 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, CVPR 2017, Honolulu, HI, USA, July 21--26, 2017. IEEE Computer Society, 2261--2269.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Thorn Jansen, Fernando Pastor Ricós, Yaping Luo, Kevin van der Vlist, Robbert van Dalen, Pekka Aho, and Tanja E. J. Vos. 2022. Scriptless GUI Testing on Mobile Applications. In 22nd IEEE International Conference on Software Quality, Reliability and Security, QRS 2022, Guangzhou, China, December 5--9, 2022. IEEE, 1103--1112.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Nataniel P. Borges Jr., Maria Gómez, and Andreas Zeller. 2018. Guiding app testing with mined interaction models. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Mobile Software Engineering and Systems, MOBILESoft@ICSE 2018, Gothenburg, Sweden, May 27 -- 28, 2018. ACM, 133--143.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Nikhil Varma Keetha, Chen Wang, Yuheng Qiu, Kuan Xu, and Sebastian A. Scherer. 2022. AirObject: A Temporally Evolving Graph Embedding for Object Identification. In IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, CVPR 2022, New Orleans, LA, USA, June 18--24, 2022. IEEE, 8397--8406.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Thomas N. Kipf and Max Welling. 2017. Semi-Supervised Classification with Graph Convolutional Networks. In 5th International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2017, Toulon, France, April 24--26, 2017, Conference Track Proceedings. OpenReview.net.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Yavuz Köroglu, Alper Sen, Ozlem Muslu, Yunus Mete, Ceyda Ulker, Tolga Tanriverdi, and Yunus Donmez. 2018. QBE: QLearning-Based Exploration of Android Applications. In 11th IEEE International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation, ICST 2018, Västerås, Sweden, April 9--13, 2018. IEEE Computer Society, 105--115.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Duling Lai and Julia Rubin. 2019. Goal-Driven Exploration for Android Applications. In 34th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, ASE 2019, San Diego, CA, USA, November 11--15, 2019. IEEE, 115--127.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Yuanchun Li, Ziyue Yang, Yao Guo, and Xiangqun Chen. 2019. Humanoid: A Deep Learning-Based Approach to Automated Black-box Android App Testing. In 34th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, ASE 2019, San Diego, CA, USA, November 11--15, 2019. IEEE, 1070--1073.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Aravind Machiry, Rohan Tahiliani, and Mayur Naik. 2013. Dynodroid: an input generation system for Android apps. In Joint Meeting of the European Software Engineering Conference and the ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering, ESEC/FSE'13, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation, August 18--26, 2013. ACM, 224--234.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. Riyadh Mahmood, Nariman Mirzaei, and Sam Malek. 2014. EvoDroid: segmented evolutionary testing of Android apps. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering, (FSE-22), Hong Kong, China, November 16 -- 22, 2014. ACM, 599--609.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Ke Mao, Mark Harman, and Yue Jia. 2016. Sapienz: multi-objective automated testing for Android applications. In Proceedings of the 25th International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis, ISSTA 2016, Saarbrücken, Germany, July 18--20, 2016. ACM, 94--105.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Leonardo Mariani, Mauro Pezzè, Oliviero Riganelli, and Mauro Santoro. 2012. AutoBlackTest: Automatic Black-Box Testing of Interactive Applications. In Fifth IEEE International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation, ICST 2012, Montreal, QC, Canada, April 17--21, 2012. IEEE Computer Society, 81--90.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Pietro Mazzaglia, Ozan Çatal, Tim Verbelen, and Bart Dhoedt. 2022. Curiosity-Driven Exploration via Latent Bayesian Surprise. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 36. 7752--7760.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. Nariman Mirzaei, Hamid Bagheri, Riyadh Mahmood, and Sam Malek. 2015. SIG-Droid: Automated system input generation for Android applications. In 2015 IEEE 26th International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering (ISSRE). 461--471.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. Nariman Mirzaei, Joshua Garcia, Hamid Bagheri, Alireza Sadeghi, and Sam Malek. 2016. Reducing combinatorics in GUI testing of android applications. In Proceedings of the 38th International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE 2016, Austin, TX, USA, May 14--22, 2016. ACM, 559--570.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. Volodymyr Mnih, Adrià Puigdomènech Badia, Mehdi Mirza, Alex Graves, Timothy P. Lillicrap, Tim Harley, David Silver, and Koray Kavukcuoglu. 2016. Asynchronous Methods for Deep Reinforcement Learning. In Proceedings of the 33nd International Conference on Machine Learning, ICML 2016, New York City, NY, USA, June 19--24, 2016 (JMLR Workshop and Conference Proceedings, Vol. 48). JMLR.org, 1928--1937.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. Volodymyr Mnih, Koray Kavukcuoglu, David Silver, Alex Graves, Ioannis Antonoglou, Daan Wierstra, and Martin A. Riedmiller. 2013. Playing Atari with Deep Reinforcement Learning. CoRR abs/1312.5602 (2013).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Volodymyr Mnih, Koray Kavukcuoglu, David Silver, Andrei A. Rusu, Joel Veness, Marc G. Bellemare, Alex Graves, Martin A. Riedmiller, Andreas Fidjeland, Georg Ostrovski, Stig Petersen, Charles Beattie, Amir Sadik, Ioannis Antonoglou, Helen King, Dharshan Kumaran, Daan Wierstra, Shane Legg, and Demis Hassabis. 2015. Human-level control through deep reinforcement learning. Nat. 518, 7540 (2015), 529--533.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. NVIDIA. 2021. CUDA Toolkit Documentation v11.3.0. Retrieved October 20, 2021 from https://docs.nvidia.com/cuda/archive/11.3.0/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. Minxue Pan, An Huang, Guoxin Wang, Tian Zhang, and Xuandong Li. 2020. Reinforcement learning based curiosity-driven testing of Android applications. In ISSTA '20: 29th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis, Virtual Event, USA, July 18--22, 2020. ACM, 153--164.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  55. Adam Paszke, Sam Gross, Francisco Massa, Adam Lerer, James Bradbury, Gregory Chanan, Trevor Killeen, Zeming Lin, Natalia Gimelshein, Luca Antiga, Alban Desmaison, Andreas Köpf, Edward Z. Yang, Zachary DeVito, Martin Raison, Alykhan Tejani, Sasank Chilamkurthy, Benoit Steiner, Lu Fang, Junjie Bai, and Soumith Chintala. 2019. PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Library. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2019, NeurIPS 2019, December 8--14, 2019, Vancouver, BC, Canada. 8024--8035.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. Deepak Pathak, Pulkit Agrawal, Alexei A. Efros, and Trevor Darrell. 2017. Curiosity-Driven Exploration by Self-Supervised Prediction. In 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops, CVPR Workshops 2017, Honolulu, HI, USA, July 21--26, 2017. IEEE Computer Society, 488--489.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  57. Nils Reimers and Iryna Gurevych. 2019. Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networks. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and the 9th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing, EMNLP-IJCNLP 2019, Hong Kong, China, November 3--7, 2019. Association for Computational Linguistics, 3980--3990.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  58. Andrea Romdhana, Alessio Merlo, Mariano Ceccato, and Paolo Tonella. 2022. Deep Reinforcement Learning for Black-box Testing of Android Apps. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 31, 4 (2022), 65:1--65:29.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  59. Nikolay Savinov, Anton Raichuk, Damien Vincent, Raphaël Marinier, Marc Pollefeys, Timothy P. Lillicrap, and Sylvain Gelly. 2019. Episodic Curiosity through Reachability. In 7th International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2019, New Orleans, LA, USA, May 6--9, 2019. OpenReview.net.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  60. Tom Schaul, John Quan, Ioannis Antonoglou, and David Silver. 2016. Prioritized Experience Replay. In 4th International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2016, San Juan, Puerto Rico, May 2--4, 2016, Conference Track Proceedings.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  61. Ting Su, Guozhu Meng, Yuting Chen, Ke Wu, Weiming Yang, Yao Yao, Geguang Pu, Yang Liu, and Zhendong Su. 2017. Guided, stochastic model-based GUI testing of Android apps. In Proceedings of the 2017 11th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering, ESEC/FSE 2017, Paderborn, Germany, September 4--8, 2017. ACM, 245--256.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  62. Ting Su, Jue Wang, and Zhendong Su. 2021. Benchmarking automated GUI testing for Android against real-world bugs. In ESEC/FSE '21: 29th ACM Joint European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering, Athens, Greece, August 23--28, 2021. ACM, 119--130.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  63. Fan-Yun Sun, Jordan Hoffmann, Vikas Verma, and Jian Tang. 2020. InfoGraph: Unsupervised and Semi-supervised Graph-Level Representation Learning via Mutual Information Maximization. In 8th International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2020, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, April 26--30, 2020. OpenReview.net.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  64. Richard S. Sutton and Andrew G. Barto. 2018. Reinforcement Learning - An Introduction (second edition). MIT Press.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  65. Hado van Hasselt, Arthur Guez, and David Silver. 2016. Deep Reinforcement Learning with Double Q-Learning. In Proceedings of the Thirtieth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, February 12--17, 2016, Phoenix, Arizona, USA. AAAI Press, 2094--2100.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  66. Thi Anh Tuyet Vuong and Shingo Takada. 2019. Semantic Analysis for Deep Q-Network in Android GUI Testing. In The 31st International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, SEKE 2019, Hotel Tivoli, Lisbon, Portugal, July 10--12, 2019. KSI Research Inc. and Knowledge Systems Institute Graduate School, 123--170.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  67. Wenyu Wang, Dengfeng Li, Wei Yang, Yurui Cao, Zhenwen Zhang, Yuetang Deng, and Tao Xie. 2018. An empirical study of Android test generation tools in industrial cases. In Proceedings of the 33rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, ASE 2018, Montpellier, France, September 3--7, 2018. ACM, 738--748.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  68. Ziyu Wang, Tom Schaul, Matteo Hessel, Hado van Hasselt, Marc Lanctot, and Nando de Freitas. 2016. Dueling Network Architectures for Deep Reinforcement Learning. In Proceedings of the 33nd International Conference on Machine Learning, ICML 2016, New York City, NY, USA, June 19--24, 2016 (JMLR Workshop and Conference Proceedings, Vol. 48). JMLR.org, 1995--2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  69. Christopher J. C. H. Watkins and Peter Dayan. 1992. Technical Note Q-Learning. Mach. Learn. 8 (1992), 279--292.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  70. Eric Wiewiora. 2010. Reward Shaping. Springer US, Boston, MA, 863--865.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  71. Zhang Xinyi and Lihui Chen. 2019. Capsule Graph Neural Network. In 7th International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2019, New Orleans, LA, USA, May 6--9, 2019. OpenReview.net.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  72. Keyulu Xu, Weihua Hu, Jure Leskovec, and Stefanie Jegelka. 2019. How Powerful are Graph Neural Networks?. In 7th International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2019, New Orleans, LA, USA, May 6--9, 2019. OpenReview.net.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  73. Minghao Xu, Hang Wang, Bingbing Ni, Hongyu Guo, and Jian Tang. 2021. Self-supervised Graph-level Representation Learning with Local and Global Structure. In Proceedings of the 38th International Conference on Machine Learning, ICML 2021, 18--24 July 2021, Virtual Event (Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, Vol. 139). PMLR, 11548--11558.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  74. Zhitao Ying, Jiaxuan You, Christopher Morris, Xiang Ren, William L. Hamilton, and Jure Leskovec. 2018. Hierarchical Graph Representation Learning with Differentiable Pooling. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 31: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2018, NeurIPS 2018, December 3--8, 2018, Montréal, Canada. 4805--4815.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  75. Zhuohan Yu, Yifu Lu, Yunhe Wang, Fan Tang, Ka-Chun Wong, and Xiangtao Li. 2022. ZINB-Based Graph Embedding Autoencoder for Single-Cell RNA-Seq Interpretations. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 36. 4671--4679.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  76. Guo Zhang, Hao He, and Dina Katabi. 2019. Circuit-GNN: Graph Neural Networks for Distributed Circuit Design. In Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Machine Learning, ICML 2019, 9--15 June 2019, Long Beach, California, USA (Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, Vol. 97). PMLR, 7364--7373.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  77. Yan Zheng, Yi Liu, Xiaofei Xie, Yepang Liu, Lei Ma, Jianye Hao, and Yang Liu. 2021. Automatic Web Testing Using Curiosity-Driven Reinforcement Learning. In 43rd IEEE/ACM International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE 2021, Madrid, Spain, 22--30 May 2021. IEEE, 423--435.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Deeply Reinforcing Android GUI Testing with Deep Reinforcement Learning

      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
        ICSE '24: Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM 46th International Conference on Software Engineering
        April 2024
        2931 pages
        ISBN:9798400702174
        DOI:10.1145/3597503

        Copyright © 2024 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: 6 February 2024

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate276of1,856submissions,15%

        Upcoming Conference

        ICSE 2025
      • Article Metrics

        • Downloads (Last 12 months)151
        • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)69

        Other Metrics

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader