2020
DOI: 10.3390/app10217537
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Model-Based Test Case Prioritization Using an Alternating Variable Method for Regression Testing of a UML-Based Model

Abstract: Many test case prioritization (TCP) studies based on regression testing using a code-based development approach have appeared. However, few studies on model-based mutation testing have explored what kind of fault seeding is appropriate or how much the code-based results differ. In this paper, as automatic seeding for the mutation generation, several mutation operators were employed for the UML statechart. Here, we suggest mutation testing employing the model-based development approach and a new TCP method base… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In a recent study, Shin [31] employed an alternating variable method to execute a model-based TCP process. The researchers customised a set of mutation rules that were applied to the state machine diagram, which subsequently led to the generation of test cases in accordance with the mutants.…”
Section: Test Case Prioritisationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In a recent study, Shin [31] employed an alternating variable method to execute a model-based TCP process. The researchers customised a set of mutation rules that were applied to the state machine diagram, which subsequently led to the generation of test cases in accordance with the mutants.…”
Section: Test Case Prioritisationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the paper [3], Shin and Lim proposed a new test case prioritization (TCP) method called AVM, which is based on an alternating variable approach, model-based development, and mutation testing. The method involves using various mutation operators as automatic seeding for mutation generation in UML statecharts.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…• Weak mutation coverage involves modifying a location in the test class (called mutant) and observing the outcomes of the original and mutant versions. In the event that the outcomes of both are the same, this indicates that the test suites are unable to execute faults or that the mutant is never executed [35,36]. The fitness function of weak mutation coverage is computed using Equation (5):…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%