skip to main content
10.1145/1982185.1982497acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessacConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

An empirical study on the effectiveness of time-aware test case prioritization techniques

Published:21 March 2011Publication History

ABSTRACT

Regression testing is often performed with a time budget and it does not allow executing all test cases. Test case prioritization techniques re-order test cases to increase the rate of fault detection. Several time-aware test case prioritization techniques have been proposed to satisfy a time budget. Since it is difficult to collect the time cost of each test case in some cases, a natural question is whether it is worth using such information when prioritizing test cases. In this paper, two most popular criteria: statement coverage and fault detection are considered for time-aware test case prioritization. We investigate whether the time cost of each test case affects the effectiveness of prioritization techniques, i.e. the rate of statement coverage and the rate of fault detection. Our empirical study shows that: although the techniques considering the time cost of each test case are slightly better than the techniques not considering such information in some cases, they have no significant difference in most cases.

References

  1. Gregg Rothermel, Roland H. Untch, Chengyun Chu, and Mary Jean Harrold. Test case prioritization: An empirical study. In ICSM, pages 179--188, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Sebastian G. Elbaum, Alexey G. Malishevsky, and Gregg Rothermel. Test case prioritization: A family of empirical studies. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 28(2): 159--182, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Hyunsook Do, Gregg Rothermel, and Alex Kinneer. Empirical studies of test case prioritization in a junit testing environment. In ISSRE, pages 113--124, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Kristen R. Walcott, Mary Lou Soffa, Gregory M. Kapfhammer, and Robert S. Roos. Time-aware test suite prioritization. In ISSTA, pages 1--12, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Lu Zhang, Shan-Shan Hou, Chao Guo, Tao Xie, and Hong Mei. Time-aware test-case prioritization using integer linear programming. In ISSTA, pages 213--224, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Sara Alspaug, Kristen R. Walcott, Michael Belanich, Gregory M. Kapfhammer, and Mary Lou Soffa. Efficient time-aware prioritization with knapsack solvers. In WEASELTech, pages 17--31, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Zengkai Ma and Jianjun Zhao. Test case prioritization based on analysis of program structure. In APSEC, pages 471--478, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Shin Yoo, Mark Harman, Paolo Tonella, and Angelo Susi. Clustering test cases to achieve effective and scalable prioritisation incorporating expert knowledge. In ISSTA, pages 201--212, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Xiaofang Zhang, Changhai Nie, Baowen Xu, and Bo Qu. Test case prioritization based on varying testing requirement priorities and test case costs. In QSIC, pages 15--24, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Hyunsook Do, Siavash Mirarab, Ladan Tahvildari, and Gregg Rothermel. An empirical study of the effect of time constraints on the cost-benefits of regression testing. In SIGSOFT FSE, pages 71--82, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Hyunsook Do, Siavash Mirarab, Ladan Tahvildari, and Gregg Rothermel. The effects of time constraints on test case prioritization: A series of controlled experiments. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 36(5): 593--617, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Sebastian G. Elbaum, Alexey G. Malishevsky, and Gregg Rothermel. Incorporating varying test costs and fault severities into test case prioritization. In ICSE, pages 329--338, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Hyunsook Do, Sebastian G. Elbaum, and Gregg Rothermel. Supporting controlled experimentation with testing techniques: An infrastructure and its potential impact. Empirical Software Engineering, 10(4): 405--435, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Zheng Li, Mark Harman, and Robert M. Hierons. Search algorithms for regression test case prioritization. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 33(4): 225--237, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Sihan Li, Naiwen Bian, Zhenyu Chen, Dongjiang You, and Yuchen He. A simulation study on some search algorithms for regression test case prioritization. In QSIC, pages 72--81, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Hao Zhong, Lu Zhang, and Hong Mei. An experimental study of four typical test suite reduction techniques. Information & Software Technology, 50(6): 534--546, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. An empirical study on the effectiveness of time-aware test case prioritization techniques

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      SAC '11: Proceedings of the 2011 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing
      March 2011
      1868 pages
      ISBN:9781450301138
      DOI:10.1145/1982185

      Copyright © 2011 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 21 March 2011

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate1,650of6,669submissions,25%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader