Abstract

Data-Flow and Higher-Order Mutation are white-box testing techniques. To our knowledge, no work has been proposed to compare data flow and Higher-Order Mutation. This paper compares all def-uses Data-Flow and second-order mutation criteria. The comparison will support the testing decision-making, especially when choosing a suitable criterion. This compassion investigates the subsumption relation between these two criteria and evaluates the effectiveness of test data developed for each. To compare the two criteria, a set of test data satisfying each criterion is generated using genetic algorithms; the set is then used to explore whether one criterion subsumes the other criterion and assess the effectiveness of the test set that was developed for one methodology in terms of the other. The results showed that the mean mutation coverage ratio of the all du-pairs adequate test cover is 80.9%, and the mean data flow coverage ratio of the second-order mutant adequate test cover is 98.7%. Consequently, second-order mutation “ProbSubsumes” the all du-pairs data flow. The failure detection efficiency of the mutation (98%) is significantly better than the failure detection efficiency of data flow (86%). Consequently, second-order mutation testing is “ProbBetter” than all du-pairs data flow testing. In contrast, the size of the test suite of second-order mutation is more significant than the size of the test suite of all du-pairs.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call