A factorial experimental evaluation of automated test input generation – Java platform testing in embedded devices
(2011) PROFES 6759. p.217-231- Abstract
- Background. When delivering an embedded product, such as a mobile phone, third party products, like games, are often bundled with it in the form of Java MIDlets. To verify the compatibility be- tween the runtime platform and the MIDlet is a labour-intensive task, if input data should be manually generated for thousands of MIDlets. Aim. In order to make the verification more efficient, we investigate four different automated input generation methods which do not require extensive modeling; random, feedback based, with and without a constant startup sequence. Method. We evaluate the methods in a factorial design experiment with manual input generation as a reference. One original experiment is run, and a partial replication. Result. The... (More)
- Background. When delivering an embedded product, such as a mobile phone, third party products, like games, are often bundled with it in the form of Java MIDlets. To verify the compatibility be- tween the runtime platform and the MIDlet is a labour-intensive task, if input data should be manually generated for thousands of MIDlets. Aim. In order to make the verification more efficient, we investigate four different automated input generation methods which do not require extensive modeling; random, feedback based, with and without a constant startup sequence. Method. We evaluate the methods in a factorial design experiment with manual input generation as a reference. One original experiment is run, and a partial replication. Result. The results show that the startup sequence gives good code coverage values for the selected MIDlets. The feedback method gives somewhat better code coverage than the random method, but requires real-time code coverage measurements, which decreases the run speed of the tests. Conclusion The random method with startup sequence is the best trade-off in the current setting. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/2174112
- author
- Runeson, Per LU ; Heed, Per and Westrup, Alexander
- organization
- publishing date
- 2011
- type
- Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding
- publication status
- published
- subject
- host publication
- Product-Focused Software Process Improvement/Lecture Notes in Computer Science
- editor
- Danilo, Caivano ; Oivo, Markku ; Baldassarre, Maria Teresa and Visaggio, Guiseppe
- volume
- 6759
- pages
- 217 - 231
- publisher
- Springer
- conference name
- PROFES
- conference location
- Torre Canne, Italy
- conference dates
- 2011-06-20 - 2011-06-22
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:79960265199
- ISBN
- 978-3-642-21843-9
- DOI
- 10.1007/978-3-642-21843-9_18
- project
- Embedded Applications Software Engineering
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 104daad3-66a3-46be-820d-5c917b08472d (old id 2174112)
- date added to LUP
- 2016-04-04 11:29:26
- date last changed
- 2022-01-29 21:58:38
@inproceedings{104daad3-66a3-46be-820d-5c917b08472d, abstract = {{Background. When delivering an embedded product, such as a mobile phone, third party products, like games, are often bundled with it in the form of Java MIDlets. To verify the compatibility be- tween the runtime platform and the MIDlet is a labour-intensive task, if input data should be manually generated for thousands of MIDlets. Aim. In order to make the verification more efficient, we investigate four different automated input generation methods which do not require extensive modeling; random, feedback based, with and without a constant startup sequence. Method. We evaluate the methods in a factorial design experiment with manual input generation as a reference. One original experiment is run, and a partial replication. Result. The results show that the startup sequence gives good code coverage values for the selected MIDlets. The feedback method gives somewhat better code coverage than the random method, but requires real-time code coverage measurements, which decreases the run speed of the tests. Conclusion The random method with startup sequence is the best trade-off in the current setting.}}, author = {{Runeson, Per and Heed, Per and Westrup, Alexander}}, booktitle = {{Product-Focused Software Process Improvement/Lecture Notes in Computer Science}}, editor = {{Danilo, Caivano and Oivo, Markku and Baldassarre, Maria Teresa and Visaggio, Guiseppe}}, isbn = {{978-3-642-21843-9}}, language = {{eng}}, pages = {{217--231}}, publisher = {{Springer}}, title = {{A factorial experimental evaluation of automated test input generation – Java platform testing in embedded devices}}, url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21843-9_18}}, doi = {{10.1007/978-3-642-21843-9_18}}, volume = {{6759}}, year = {{2011}}, }