TY - GEN
T1 - An experimental comparison of the effectiveness of the all-uses and all-edges adequacy criteria
AU - Frankl, Phyllis G.
AU - Weiss, Stewart N.
N1 - Funding Information:
Science Dept., Polytechnic Uti- N.Y. 11201. Supported by and by the New York State Science Center for Advanced Technology
Funding Information:
* Author’s address: Computer versity, 333 Jay St., Brooklyn, NSF Grant CCR-8810287 and Technology Foundation program. t Author’s address: Computer Science Dept., 695 Park Ave., New York, NY 10021. Supported CC R-9008394 and by PSC-CUNY Award 661341.
Publisher Copyright:
© 1991 ACM.
PY - 1991/10/1
Y1 - 1991/10/1
N2 - An experimental comparison of the effectiveness of the all-uses and all-edges test data adequacy criteria was performed. A large number of test sets was randomly generated for each of nine subject programs with subtle errors. For each test set, the percentages of (executable) edges and definition-use associations covered were measured and it was determined whether the test set exposed an error. Hypothesis testing was used to investigate whether all-uses adequate test sets are more likely to expose errors than are all-edges adequate test sets. All-uses was shown to be significantly more effective than all-edges for five of the subjects; moreover, for four of these, all-uses appeared to guarantee detection of the error. Further analysis showed that in four subjects, all-uses adequate test sets appeared to be more effective than all-edges adequate test sets of the same size. Logistic regression showed that in some, but not all of the subjects there was a strong positive correlation between the percentage of definition-use associations covered by a test set and its error-exposing ability.
AB - An experimental comparison of the effectiveness of the all-uses and all-edges test data adequacy criteria was performed. A large number of test sets was randomly generated for each of nine subject programs with subtle errors. For each test set, the percentages of (executable) edges and definition-use associations covered were measured and it was determined whether the test set exposed an error. Hypothesis testing was used to investigate whether all-uses adequate test sets are more likely to expose errors than are all-edges adequate test sets. All-uses was shown to be significantly more effective than all-edges for five of the subjects; moreover, for four of these, all-uses appeared to guarantee detection of the error. Further analysis showed that in four subjects, all-uses adequate test sets appeared to be more effective than all-edges adequate test sets of the same size. Logistic regression showed that in some, but not all of the subjects there was a strong positive correlation between the percentage of definition-use associations covered by a test set and its error-exposing ability.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=1442300701&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=1442300701&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1145/120807.120821
DO - 10.1145/120807.120821
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:1442300701
T3 - Proceedings of the Symposium on Testing, Analysis, and Verification, TAV 1991
SP - 154
EP - 164
BT - Proceedings of the Symposium on Testing, Analysis, and Verification, TAV 1991
PB - Association for Computing Machinery, Inc
T2 - 4th Symposium on Testing, Analysis, and Verification, TAV 1991
Y2 - 8 October 1991 through 10 October 1991
ER -