Guidelines for the verification and validation of expert system software and conventional software: Evaluation of knowledge base certification methods. Volume 4

Miller, Lance A.; Hayes, Jim; Mirsky, S.M.

doi:10.2172/42517

Cited by 2 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Broad power refers to a technique's ability to find many classes of faults. Hard power refers to a technique's ability to find "difficult to detect" classes of faults (Miller et al 1995). Input validation testing, then, is defined as choosing test data that attempt to show the presence or absence of specific faults pertaining to input-tolerance while exhibiting broad power at the system level.…”

Section: Scopementioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are two sources of rules for generating erroneous test cases: The error condition rule base (based on Beizer 1990 and Marick 1995 and our work with Miller et al 1995) and the test obligation database (purely novel work by the authors). The test obligation database is built during static analysis.…”

Section: Generating Error Test Casesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Erroneous test cases are generated from both the error condition rule base and the test obligation database. The error condition rule base is based on the Beizer (1990) and Marick (1995) lists of practical error cases and previous work for NRC and EPRI (Miller et al 1995). The NRC and EPRI research (Miller et al 1995) Two types of error test cases are generated from the test obligation database, overloaded token static error/ambiguous grammar static error and catenation static error.…”

Section: Generating Error Test Casesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The error condition rule base is based on the Beizer (1990) and Marick (1995) lists of practical error cases and previous work for NRC and EPRI (Miller et al 1995). The NRC and EPRI research (Miller et al 1995) Two types of error test cases are generated from the test obligation database, overloaded token static error/ambiguous grammar static error and catenation static error. For overloaded token static error/ambiguous grammar static error, an overloaded token is inserted into the ambiguous elements of a test case, based on the ambiguous value and the ambiguous character numbers identified during static analysis.…”

Section: Generating Error Test Casesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…3 Note that although the types of error cases to generate were inspired by Marick 1995, Beizer 1990, and Miller et al 1995, the generation of the actual test cases is novel (the algorithms for how to simulate the types of faults). For example, the test case for top, intermediate, and field-level syntax errors is novel and was not reported by Marick 1995, Beizer 1990, or Miller et al 1995 2 All four fault types are detectable by a large percentage of available verification and validation techniques, thus broad power is exhibited (per Miller et al 1995).…”

Section: Generating Error Test Casesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Input validation analysis and testing

Hayes

Offutt

2006

Empir Software Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research addresses the problem of statically analyzing input command syntax as defined in interface and requirements specifications and then generating test cases for dynamic input validation testing. The IVAT (Input Validation Analysis and Testing) technique has been developed, a proof-of-concept tool (MICASA) has been implemented, and a case study validation has been performed. Empirical validation on large-scale industrial software (from the Tomahawk Cruise Missile) shows that as compared with senior, experienced analysts and testers, MICASA found more syntactic requirement specification defects, generated test cases with higher syntactic coverage, and found additional defects. The experienced analysts found more semantic defects than MICASA, and the experienced testers' cases found 7.4 defects per test case as opposed to an average of 4.6 defects found by MICASA test cases. Additionally, the MICASA tool performed at less cost.

show abstract

Section: Scopementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Generating Error Test Casesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Generating Error Test Casesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Generating Error Test Casesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Generating Error Test Casesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Input validation analysis and testing

Hayes

Offutt

2006

Empir Software Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Fault Links: Exploring the Relationship Between Module and Fault Types

Hayes

Raphael

Surisetty

et al. 2005

Dependable Computing - EDCC 5

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fault links represent relationships between the types of mistakes made and the type of module being developed or modified. The existence of such fault links can be used to guide code reviews, walkthroughs, allocation of verification and validation resources, testing of new code development, as well as code maintenance. We present an approach for categorizing code faults and code modules, and a means for examining relationships between the two. We successfully applied our approach to two case studies.

show abstract

Guidelines for the verification and validation of expert system software and conventional software: Evaluation of knowledge base certification methods. Volume 4

Cited by 2 publications

References 3 publications

Input validation analysis and testing

Input validation analysis and testing

Fault Links: Exploring the Relationship Between Module and Fault Types

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About