On the statistical properties of testing effectiveness measures

被引:47
作者
Chen, Tsong Yueh [1 ]
Kuo, Fei-Ching [1 ]
Merkel, Robert [1 ]
机构
[1] Swinburne Univ Technol, Fac Informat & Commun Technol, Hawthorn, Vic 3122, Australia
基金
澳大利亚研究理事会;
关键词
testing effectiveness metric; quality measurement; adaptive random testing; random testing; software testing;
D O I
10.1016/j.jss.2005.05.029
中图分类号
TP31 [计算机软件];
学科分类号
081202 ; 0835 ;
摘要
We examine the statistical variability of three commonly used software testing effectiveness measures-the E-measure (expected number of failures detected), P-measure (probability of detecting at least one failure), and F-measure (number of tests required to detect the first failure). We show that for random testing with replacement, the F-measure will be distributed according to the geometric distribution. A simulation study examines the distribution of two adaptive random testing methods, to investigate how closely their sampling distributions approximate the geometric distribution. One key observation is that in the worst case scenario, the sampling distribution of adaptive random testing is very similar to that of random testing. The E-measure and P-measure have a normal sampling distribution, but high variability, meaning that large sample sizes are required to obtain results with satisfactorily narrow confidence intervals. We illustrate this with a simulation study for the P-measure. Our results have reinforced, from a perspective other than empirical analysis, that adaptive random testing is a more effective alternative to random testing, with reference to the F-measure. We consider the implications of out-findings for previous studies conducted in the area, and make recommendations to future studies. (c) 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:591 / 601
页数:11
相关论文
共 14 条
[1]   Proportional sampling strategy: Guidelines for software testing practitioners [J].
Chan, FT ;
Chen, TY ;
Mak, IK ;
Yu, YT .
INFORMATION AND SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGY, 1996, 38 (12) :775-782
[2]  
Chan KP, 2002, LECT NOTES COMPUT SC, V2349, P321
[3]  
Chen TY, 2004, LECT NOTES COMPUT SC, V3321, P320
[4]   Mirror adaptive random testing [J].
Chen, TY ;
Kuo, FC ;
Merkel, RG ;
Ng, SP .
INFORMATION AND SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGY, 2004, 46 (15) :1001-1010
[5]   On the expected number of failures detected by subdomain testing and random testing [J].
Chen, TY ;
Yu, YT .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SOFTWARE ENGINEERING, 1996, 22 (02) :109-119
[6]   Partition testing vs. random testing: The influence of uncertainty [J].
Gutjahr, WJ .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SOFTWARE ENGINEERING, 1999, 25 (05) :661-674
[7]   PARTITION TESTING DOES NOT INSPIRE CONFIDENCE [J].
HAMLET, D ;
TAYLOR, R .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SOFTWARE ENGINEERING, 1990, 16 (12) :1402-1411
[8]   In-process metrics for software testing [J].
Kan, SH ;
Parrish, J ;
Manlove, D .
IBM SYSTEMS JOURNAL, 2001, 40 (01) :220-241
[9]   RANDOM TESTING REVISITED [J].
LOO, PS ;
TSAI, WK .
INFORMATION AND SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGY, 1988, 30 (07) :402-417
[10]  
Matsumoto M., 1998, ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation, V8, P3, DOI 10.1145/272991.272995