An analysis of automated tests for mobile Android applications

Silva, Davi Bernardo; Endo, André Takeshi; Eler, Marcelo Medeiros; Durelli, Vinícius H. S.

doi:10.1109/clei.2016.7833334

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, some tools test Android applications not looking at the components of the interface, but rather through events generated for the application simulating the user touching the screen, events from the system, and also through data from the sensors of the device. For these tools, we [90], CrashScope [18,52], DroidBot [19], M[agi]C [58], ACTEve [47], PATS [77], BBOXTESTER [92], AppDoctor [63], ORBIT [39], Fest [45], Easy-Mock [45], Hamcrest [45], JUnit [45], Robolectric [45], Robotium [45] [79], Android.Test [45], DroidCrawler [54], Custom-built version of the calabashandroid [44], CATE [57], MobiGUITAR [105], [41], Context Simulator [37], ADAutomation [38], MAT [46], AM-TaaS [49], VTE [55], [59], ACRT [56], EHB-Droid [64], ATG [73], SPAG-C [76], Appetizer [79], Bot-bot [79], Culebra [79], monkeyrunner [79], Mosaic [79], Ranorex [79], HiroMacro [79], Repeti-Touch [79], MAFT [82], MBTS4MA [83], SIG-Droid …”

Section: Rq 11: What Technique Do They Implement?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Among the studies found by the systematic mapping, Bernardo et al [45] present an investigation on 19 opensource mobile applications for Android in order to identify how automated tests are employed in practice. They concluded that 47% of these applications have some kind of automated tests, and they observed that the most used testing tools were JUnit, Android.Test, Hamcrest, Robolectric, EasyMock, Robotium, and Fest.…”

Section: Rq 12: What Are the Most Used Ones?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Tools found in the SMS Tools SlumDroid[36] and GUIAnalyzer[36], Espresso[50] [45,79], Espresso Recorder[79], UIAutomator[50], Selendroid[50], Silk Mobile[50], Sikuli GUI Automation Tool[50], Segen[85], DroidMate[61], FSMdroid[70],SwiftHand [72] [72], A 3 E [89,103], TrimDroid[80], AMOGA[88], AGRippin[40], AndroidRipper[43], Extended AndroidRipper[42], T+[65], QUANTUM 6823880, Collider[51], EvoDroid[66], VeriDroid[95], JPF-ANDROID[68], Improved JPF-ANDROID[67], Thor[87], Monkey[104], Improved Monkey[53], PUMA[78], Dynodroid[62], ATT[69], Sapienz[84], DroidFuzzer [60], VALERA [71] [74, 79, 94, 96], MobiPlay [75] [79], RERAN [81] [79], Testdroid…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Testing tools for Android context-aware applications: a systematic mapping

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context: Mobile devices, such as smartphones, have increased their capacity of information processing and sensors have been aggregated to their hardware. Such sensors allow capturing information from the environment in which they are introduced. As a result, mobile applications that use the environment and user information to provide services or perform context-based actions are increasingly common. This type of application is known as context-aware application. While software testing is an expensive activity in general, testing context-aware applications is an even more expensive and challenging activity. Thus, efforts are needed to automate testing for context-aware applications, particularly in the scope of Android, which is currently the most used operating system by smartphones. Objective: This paper aims to identify and discuss the state-of-the-art tools that allow the automation of testing Android context-aware applications. Method: In order to do so, we carried out a systematic mapping study (SMS) to find out the studies in the existing literature that describe or present Android testing tools. The discovered tools were then analyzed to identify their potential in testing Android context-aware applications. Result: A total of 68 works and 80 tools were obtained as a result of the SMS. From the identified tools, five are context-aware Android application testing tools, and five are general Android application testing tools, but support the test of the context-aware feature. Conclusion: Although context-aware application testing tools do exist, they do not support automatic generation or execution of test cases focusing on high-level contexts. Moreover, they do not support asynchronous context variations.

show abstract