skip to main content
10.1145/3597926.3598138acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesisstaConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

An Empirical Study of Functional Bugs in Android Apps

Published:13 July 2023Publication History

ABSTRACT

Android apps are ubiquitous and serve many aspects of our daily lives. Ensuring their functional correctness is crucial for their success. To date, we still lack a general and in-depth understanding of functional bugs, which hinders the development of practices and techniques to tackle functional bugs. To fill this gap, we conduct the first systematic study on 399 functional bugs from 8 popular open-source and representative Android apps to investigate the root causes, bug symptoms, test oracles, and the capabilities and limitations of existing testing techniques. This study took us substantial effort. It reveals several new interesting findings and implications which help shed light on future research on tackling functional bugs. Furthermore, findings from our study guided the design of a proof-of-concept differential testing tool, RegDroid, to automatically find functional bugs in Android apps. We applied RegDroid on 5 real-world popular apps, and successfully discovered 14 functional bugs, 10 of which were previously unknown and affected the latest released versions—all these 10 bugs have been confirmed and fixed by the app developers. Specifically, 10 out of these 14 found bugs cannot be found by existing testing techniques. We have made all the artifacts (including the dataset of 399 functional bugs and RegDroid) in our work publicly available at https://github.com/Android-Functional-bugs-study/home.

References

  1. Christoffer Quist Adamsen, Gianluca Mezzetti, and Anders Møller. 2015. Systematic execution of Android test suites in adverse conditions. In Proceedings of the 2015 International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis (ISSTA). 83–93. https://doi.org/10.1145/2771783.2771786 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Anders Toxboe. 2022. Design patterns. https://ui-patterns.com/patterns Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Android. 2022. Input events overview. https://developer.android.com/develop/ui/views/touch-and-input/input-events Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. AppBrain Team. 2023. Most popular Google Play categories. https://www.appbrain.com/stats/android-market-app-categories Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Earl T. Barr, Mark Harman, Phil McMinn, Muzammil Shahbaz, and Shin Yoo. 2015. The Oracle Problem in Software Testing: A Survey. IEEE Trans. Software Eng., 41, 5 (2015), 507–525. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2014.2372785 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Farnaz Behrang and Alessandro Orso. 2019. Test migration between mobile apps with similar functionality. In 2019 34th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE). 54–65. https://doi.org/10.1109/ASE.2019.00016 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Tsong Y. Chen, Shing C. Cheung, and Shiu Ming Yiu. 2020. Metamorphic testing: a new approach for generating next test cases. HKUST-CS98-01, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. 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). 429–440. https://doi.org/10.1109/ASE.2015.89 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Koen Claessen and John Hughes. 2000. QuickCheck: a lightweight tool for random testing of Haskell programs. In Proceedings of the Fifth ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Functional Programming (ICFP). 268–279. https://doi.org/10.1145/351240.351266 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Compuware. 2013. Users Have Low Tolerance For Buggy Apps - Only 16% Will Try A Failing App More Than Twice. https://techcrunch.com/2013/03/12/users-have-low-tolerance-for-buggy-apps-only-16-will-try-a-failing-app-more-than-twice/ Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Quan Chau Dong Do, Guowei Yang, Meiru Che, Darren Hui, and Jefferson Ridgeway. 2016. Redroid: A Regression Test Selection Approach for Android Applications. In The 28th International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering (SEKE). 486–491. https://doi.org/10.18293/SEKE2016-223 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Dawson R. Engler, David Yu Chen, and Andy Chou. 2001. Bugs as Deviant Behavior: A General Approach to Inferring Errors in Systems Code. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Symposium on Operating System Principles (SOSP 2001). 57–72. https://doi.org/10.1145/502034.502041 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Camilo Escobar-Velásquez, Michael Osorio-Riaño, Juan Dominguez-Osorio, Maria Arevalo, and Mario Linares-Vásquez. 2020. An Empirical Study of i18n Collateral Changes and Bugs in GUIs of Android apps. In IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME). 581–592. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSME46990.2020.00061 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Lingling Fan, Ting Su, Sen Chen, Guozhu Meng, Yang Liu, Lihua Xu, Geguang Pu, and Zhendong Su. 2018. Large-scale analysis of framework-specific exceptions in Android apps. In Proceedings of the 40th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE). 408–419. https://doi.org/10.1145/3180155.3180222 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Umar Farooq, Zhijia Zhao, Manu Sridharan, and Iulian Neamtiu. 2020. Livedroid: Identifying and preserving mobile app state in volatile runtime environments. Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages, 4, OOPSLA (2020), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1145/3428228 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Mattia Fazzini and Alessandro Orso. 2017. Automated cross-platform inconsistency detection for mobile apps. In Proceedings of the 32nd IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE). 308–318. https://doi.org/10.1109/ASE.2017.8115644 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Mattia Fazzini, Martin Prammer, Marcelo d’Amorim, and Alessandro Orso. 2018. Automatically translating bug reports into test cases for mobile apps. In Proceedings of the 27th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis (ISSTA). 141–152. https://doi.org/10.1145/3213846.3213869 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Gil Bouhnick. 2019. Visually distorted - when symmetrical UI looks all wrong. https://www.mobilespoon.net/2019/08/visually-distorted-when-ui-looks-all.html Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Google. 2022. Google Issue Tracker. https://issuetracker.google.com/issues/37124582?pli=1 Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Google. 2022. Google Play Store. https://play.google.com/store/apps Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Wunan Guo, Zhen Dong, Liwei Shen, Wei Tian, Ting Su, and Xin Peng. 2022. Detecting and fixing data loss issues in Android apps. In ISSTA ’22: 31st ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis. 605–616. https://doi.org/10.1145/3533767.3534402 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Hacker News. 2013. Tell Facebook: There’s a severe bug when changing profile pics on the iOS app. Retrieved 2022-8 from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6456285 Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Cuixiong Hu and Iulian Neamtiu. 2011. Automating GUI testing for Android applications. In Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Automation of Software Test (AST). 77–83. https://doi.org/10.1145/1982595.1982612 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. 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). 269–282. https://doi.org/10.1145/3236024.3236055 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Jiajun Hu, Lili Wei, Yepang Liu, Shing-Chi Cheung, and Huaxun Huang. 2018. A tale of two cities: how WebView induces bugs to Android applications. In Proceedings of the 33rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE). 702–713. https://doi.org/10.1145/3238147.3238180 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Ajay Kumar Jha, Sunghee Lee, and Woo Jin Lee. 2019. Characterizing Android-specific crash bugs. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Mobile Software Engineering and Systems (MOBILESoft). 111–122. https://doi.org/10.1109/MOBILESoft.2019.00024 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Bo Jiang, Yu Wu, Yongfei Zhang, Zhenyu Zhang, and W. K. Chan. 2018. ReTestDroid: Towards Safer Regression Test Selection for Android Application. In 2018 IEEE 42nd Annual Computer Software and Applications Conference (COMPSAC). 235–244. https://doi.org/10.1109/COMPSAC.2018.00037 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Jack Johnson, Junayed Mahmud, Tyler Wendland, Kevin Moran, Julia Rubin, and Mattia Fazzini. 2022. An Empirical Investigation into the Reproduction of Bug Reports for Android Apps. In 2022 IEEE International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (SANER). 321–322. https://doi.org/10.1109/SANER53432.2022.00048 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Yavuz Köroglu and Alper Sen. 2021. Functional test generation from UI test scenarios using reinforcement learning for android applications. Softw. Test. Verification Reliab., 31, 3 (2021), https://doi.org/10.1002/stvr.1752 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Edmund S. L. Lam, Peilun Zhang, and Bor-Yuh Evan Chang. 2017. ChimpCheck: property-based randomized test generation for interactive apps. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGPLAN International Symposium on New Ideas, New Paradigms, and Reflections on Programming and Software (Onward!). 58–77. https://doi.org/10.1145/3133850.3133853 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Xiao Li, Nana Chang, Yan Wang, Haohua Huang, Yu Pei, Linzhang Wang, and Xuandong Li. 2017. ATOM: Automatic maintenance of GUI test scripts for evolving mobile applications. In 2017 IEEE International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation (ICST). 161–171. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICST.2017.22 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. Zhenmin Li, Lin Tan, Xuanhui Wang, Shan Lu, Yuanyuan Zhou, and Chengxiang Zhai. 2006. Have things changed now?: an empirical study of bug characteristics in modern open source software. In Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Architectural and System Support for Improving Software Dependability (ASID). 25–33. https://doi.org/10.1145/1181309.1181314 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Jun-Wei Lin, Reyhaneh Jabbarvand, and Sam Malek. 2019. Test Transfer Across Mobile Apps Through Semantic Mapping. In 34th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE). 42–53. https://doi.org/10.1109/ASE.2019.00015 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Ying-Dar Lin, José F. Rojas, Edward T.-H. Chu, and Yuan-Cheng Lai. 2014. On the Accuracy, Efficiency, and Reusability of Automated Test Oracles for Android Devices. IEEE Trans. Software Eng., 40, 10 (2014), 957–970. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2014.2331982 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Lint Team. 2022. Android Lint. http://tools.android.com/lint/overview Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Zhe Liu, Chunyang Chen, Junjie Wang, Yuekai Huang, Jun Hu, and Qing Wang. 2020. Owl Eyes: Spotting UI Display Issues via Visual Understanding. In 35th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE). 398–409. https://doi.org/10.1145/3324884.3416547 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Localytics. 2019. 25% of Users Abandon Apps After One Use. http://info.localytics.com/blog/25-of-users-abandon-apps-after-one-use Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Leonardo Mariani, Mauro Pezzè, and Daniele Zuddas. 2018. Augusto: exploiting popular functionalities for the generation of semantic GUI tests with Oracles. In Proceedings of the 40th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE). 280–290. https://doi.org/10.1145/3180155.3180162 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Martijn van Welie. 2008. Pattern library. http://www.welie.com/patterns/index.php Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. William M McKeeman. 1998. Differential testing for software. Digital Technical Journal, 10, 1 (1998), 100–107. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Motherboard. 2020. Here’s the Shadow Inc. App That Failed in Iowa Last Night. https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/y3m33x/heres-the-shadow-inc-app-that-failed-in-iowa-last-night Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Liam O’Connor and Oskar Wickström. 2022. Quickstrom: property-based acceptance testing with LTL specifications. In Proceedings of the 43rd ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation (PLDI). 1025–1038. https://doi.org/10.1145/3519939.3523728 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Dominik Pacholczyk. 2014. Mobile UI Design Patterns A Deeper Look At The Hottest Apps Today. www.uxpin.com. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Reuters. 2021. Japan’s COVID-19 app failed to pass on some contact warnings. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-japan-app-idUSKBN2A31BA Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Vincenzo Riccio, Domenico Amalfitano, and Anna Rita Fasolino. 2018. Is this the lifecycle we really want?: an automated black-box testing approach for Android activities. In Companion Proceedings for the ISSTA/ECOOP 2018 Workshops (ISSTA). 68–77. https://doi.org/10.1145/3236454.3236490 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Oliviero Riganelli, Simone Paolo Mottadelli, Claudio Rota, Daniela Micucci, and Leonardo Mariani. 2020. Data loss detector: automatically revealing data loss bugs in Android apps. In ISSTA ’20: 29th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis. 141–152. https://doi.org/10.1145/3395363.3397379 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Ariel Rosenfeld, Odaya Kardashov, and Orel Zang. 2018. Automation of android applications functional testing using machine learning activities classification. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Mobile Software Engineering and Systems. 122–132. https://doi.org/10.1145/3197231.3197241 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Konstantin Rubinov and Luciano Baresi. 2018. What Are We Missing When Testing Our Android Apps? Computer, 51, 4 (2018), 60–68. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  49. Zhiyong Shan, Tanzirul Azim, and Iulian Neamtiu. 2016. Finding resume and restart errors in android applications. ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 51, 10 (2016), 864–880. https://doi.org/10.1145/3022671.2984011 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. Aman Sharma and Rupesh Nasre. 2019. QADroid: regression event selection for Android applications. In Proceedings of the 28th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis (ISSTA). 66–77. https://doi.org/10.1145/3293882.3330550 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. Sixth Tone. 2019. E-Commerce App Loses ‘Tens of Millions’ From Coupon Glitches. https://www.sixthtone.com/news/1003483/e-commerce-app-loses-tens-of-millions-from-coupon-glitches Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Donna Spencer and T Warfel. 2004. Card Sorting. Boxes and arrows, 7 (2004). Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. statcounter. 2022. Mobile Operating System Market Share Worldwide. https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/mobile/worldwide Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. Ting Su, Lingling Fan, Sen Chen, Yang Liu, Lihua Xu, Geguang Pu, and Zhendong Su. 2022. Why My App Crashes? Understanding and Benchmarking Framework-Specific Exceptions of Android Apps. IEEE Trans. Software Eng., 48, 4 (2022), 1115–1137. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2020.3013438 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  55. 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 The joint meeting of the European Software Engineering Conference and the ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering (ESEC/FSE). 245–256. https://doi.org/10.1145/3106237.3106298 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  56. Ting Su, Jue Wang, and Zhendong Su. 2021. Benchmarking automated GUI testing for Android against real-world bugs. In 29th ACM Joint European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering (ESEC/FSE). 119–130. https://doi.org/10.1145/3468264.3468620 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  57. Ting Su, Yichen Yan, Jue Wang, Jingling Sun, Yiheng Xiong, Geguang Pu, Ke Wang, and Zhendong Su. 2021. Fully automated functional fuzzing of Android apps for detecting non-crashing logic bugs. Proc. ACM Program. Lang., 5, OOPSLA (2021), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1145/3485533 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  58. Jingling Sun, Ting Su, Junxin Li, Zhen Dong, Geguang Pu, Tao Xie, and Zhendong Su. 2021. Understanding and finding system setting-related defects in Android apps. In ISSTA ’21: 30th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis. 204–215. https://doi.org/10.1145/3460319.3464806 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  59. Jingling Sun, Ting Su, Kai Liu, Chao Peng, Zhao Zhang, Geguang Pu, Tao Xie, and Zhendong Su. 2023. Characterizing and Finding System Setting-Related Defects in Android Apps. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2023.3236449 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  60. Lin Tan, Chen Liu, Zhenmin Li, Xuanhui Wang, Yuanyuan Zhou, and Chengxiang Zhai. 2014. Bug characteristics in open source software. Empirical software engineering, 19, 6 (2014), 1665–1705. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-013-9258-8 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  61. ASCII Team. 2022. ASCII Codes Table. https://ascii.cl/ Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  62. Jenifer Tidwell. 2010. Designing interfaces: Patterns for effective interaction design. " O’Reilly Media, Inc.". Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  63. uiautomator2 Team. 2021. uiautomator2. https://github.com/openatx/uiautomator2 Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  64. Mario Linares Vásquez, Kevin Moran, and Denys Poshyvanyk. 2017. Continuous, Evolutionary and Large-Scale: A New Perspective for Automated Mobile App Testing. In 2017 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME). 399–410. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSME.2017.27 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  65. Jue Wang, Yanyan Jiang, Ting Su, Shaohua Li, Chang Xu, Jian Lu, and Zhendong Su. 2022. Detecting non-crashing functional bugs in Android apps via deep-state differential analysis. In Proceedings of the 30th ACM Joint European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering (ESEC/FSE). 434–446. https://doi.org/10.1145/3540250.3549170 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  66. 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). 738–748. https://doi.org/10.1145/3238147.3240465 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  67. Lili Wei, Yepang Liu, and Shing-Chi Cheung. 2016. Taming Android fragmentation: characterizing and detecting compatibility issues for Android apps. In Proceedings of the 31st IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE). 226–237. https://doi.org/10.1145/2970276.2970312 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  68. Tyler Wendland, Jingyang Sun, Junayed Mahmud, S. M. Hasan Mansur, Steven Huang, Kevin Moran, Julia Rubin, and Mattia Fazzini. 2021. Andror2: A Dataset of Manually-Reproduced Bug Reports for Android apps. In 18th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Mining Software Repositories (MSR0). 600–604. https://doi.org/10.1109/MSR52588.2021.00082 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  69. Razieh Nokhbeh Zaeem, Mukul R. Prasad, and Sarfraz Khurshid. 2014. Automated Generation of Oracles for Testing User-Interaction Features of Mobile Apps. In Seventh IEEE International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation (ICST). 183–192. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICST.2014.31 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  70. Yu Zhao, Tingting Yu, Ting Su, Yang Liu, Wei Zheng, Jingzhi Zhang, and William G. J. Halfond. 2019. ReCDroid: automatically reproducing Android application crashes from bug reports. In Proceedings of the 41st International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE). 128–139. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSE.2019.00030 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. An Empirical Study of Functional Bugs in Android Apps

    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
      ISSTA 2023: Proceedings of the 32nd ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis
      July 2023
      1554 pages
      ISBN:9798400702211
      DOI:10.1145/3597926

      Copyright © 2023 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: 13 July 2023

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate58of213submissions,27%

      Upcoming Conference

      ISSTA '24

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader