The iMPAcT Tool: Testing UI Patterns on Mobile Applications

Morgado, Inês Coimbra; Paiva, Ana C. R.

doi:10.1109/ase.2015.96

Cited by 22 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We use Monsoon's Original Power Monitor with the sample rate set to 5000Hz, as used in previous research [10], [11], [28], [34], [35], [36], [37], [38]. Measurements are obtained using the Physalia toolset 6 Python library to collect energy consumption measurements in Android devices. It takes care of syncing the beginning and ending of the UI interaction script with the measurements collected from the power monitor.…”

Section: Energy Data Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Energy Footprint of Mobile Testing Frameworks

Cruz

Abreu

2021

IIEEE Trans. Software Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

High energy consumption is a challenging issue that an ever increasing number of mobile applications face today. However, energy consumption is being tested in an ad hoc way, despite being an important non-functional requirement of an application. Such limitation becomes particularly disconcerting during software testing: on the one hand, developers do not really know how to measure energy; on the other hand, there is no knowledge as to what is the energy overhead imposed by the testing framework. In this paper, as we evaluate eight popular mobile UI automation frameworks, we have discovered that there are automation frameworks that increase energy consumption up to roughly 2200%. While limited in the interactions one can do, Espresso is the most energy efficient framework. However, depending on the needs of the tester, Appium, Monkeyrunner, or UIAutomator are good alternatives. In practice, results show that deciding which is the most suitable framework is vital. We provide a decision tree to help developers make an educated decision on which framework suits best their testing needs.

show abstract

Section: Energy Data Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Energy Footprint of Mobile Testing Frameworks

Cruz

Abreu

2021

IIEEE Trans. Software Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The authors proposed an approach to verify automatically the feature interactions and a tool was developed to exhaustively test them. Morgado and Paiva [15] introduce a catalog of behavioral principles of the Android UI elements. Such behavioral principles are described as test patterns related to UI menu elements (drawer style) and device rotation.…”

Section: Background and Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While test amplification and test patterns have been investigated [15], [16], [18], the state of the art in mobile app testing is focused on native Android apps [11], [12]. On the other hand, cross-platform app development has gained momentum by winning a meaningful market share, and being supported by big players of the software industry like Facebook, Microsoft, and Apache Software Foundation.…”

Section: Background and Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is a promising strategy for mobile apps that are susceptible to bugs related to device rotation, interruptions, loss of resources, unique UI events/components, and so on. The verification of such specific features can be described in a well-defined set of generic actions and expected behavior called test pattern [15], [19]. The amplification by test patterns has been explored in native Android apps and results have shown effective bug detection [15], [16], [18], [19].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The verification of such specific features can be described in a well-defined set of generic actions and expected behavior called test pattern [15], [19]. The amplification by test patterns has been explored in native Android apps and results have shown effective bug detection [15], [16], [18], [19]. However, little is known on how test amplification performs in mobile apps developed with cross-platform frameworks.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Amplifying Tests for Cross-Platform Apps through Test Patterns

Assis¹,

Menegassi²,

Endo³

2019

International Conferences on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cross-platform app development has achieved meaningful results in practice with frameworks like React Native, Xamarin, and Apache Cordova. Unlike native apps, such frameworks support the development of a mobile app that can run in different platforms. Nevertheless, the literature lacks techniques to test cross-platform apps since most of the existing works focus on native Android apps. A promising strategy for native apps is to amplify test suites so that the specific characteristics of mobile apps can be tested. This paper aims to investigate the test amplification of cross-platform apps. To do so, we apply four test patterns that verify well-known characteristics of mobile computing and amplify existing test suites. The proposed approach has been implemented in a tool capable of generating Appium test scripts and was evaluated with nine cross-platform apps. The amplified test suites exercise new scenarios, uncovering 23 unique bugs in eight out of nine apps.

show abstract

GUICop: Approach and toolset for specification‐based GUI testing

Hammoud

Zaraket

Masri

2017

Software Testing Verif & Rel

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Oracles used for testing graphical user interface (GUI) programs are required to take into consideration complicating factors such as variations in screen resolution or color scheme when comparing observed GUI elements to expected GUI elements.Researchers proposed fuzzy comparison rules and computationally expensive image processing techniques to tame the comparison process since otherwise the naïve matching comparison would be too constraining and consequently impractical.Alternatively, this paper proposes GUICop, a novel approach with a supporting toolset that takes (1) a GUI program and (2) user-defined GUI specifications characterizing the rendering behavior of the GUI elements, and checks whether the execution traces of the program satisfy the specifications. GUICop comprises the following: 1) a GUI Specification Language; 2) a Driver; 3)Instrumented GUI Libraries; 4) a Solver; and 5) a Code Weaver. The user defines the specifications of the subject GUI program using the GUI Specification Language.The Driver traverses the GUI structure of the program and generates events that drive its execution. The Instrumented GUI Libraries capture the GUI execution trace, i.e., information about the positions and visibility of the GUI elements. And the Solver, enabled by code injected by the Code Weaver, checks whether the traces satisfy the specifications.GUICop was successfully evaluated using four open source GUI applications that included eight defects, namely, Jajuk, Gason, JEdit, and TerpPaint.

show abstract

The iMPAcT Tool: Testing UI Patterns on Mobile Applications

Cited by 22 publications

References 24 publications

On the Energy Footprint of Mobile Testing Frameworks

On the Energy Footprint of Mobile Testing Frameworks

Amplifying Tests for Cross-Platform Apps through Test Patterns

GUICop: Approach and toolset for specification‐based GUI testing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About