Regression testing minimization, selection and prioritization: a survey
Software Testing, Verification & Reliability
Graphical user interface (GUI) testing: Systematic mapping and repository
Information and Software Technology
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
This paper reports an empirical evaluation of four black-box testing techniques for crashing programs through their GUI interface: SH, AF, DH, and BxT. The techniques vary in their level of automation and the results they offer. The experiments we conducted quantify execution time and the capability of finding a crash for each technique on 8 different cellular phone configurations with historical (real) errors. The results show that AF and BxT offered better precision (i.e., the fraction of runs that end in a crash out of the total number of runs) than SH and DH (AF and BxT found crashes in all 8 configurations), and BxT crashes the application the fastest more often (5 out of 8 cases). The experiments reveal that the selection of the random seed to AF and BxT results in a high variance of execution time (i.e., the time the technique takes to either crash the application or timeout in 40h): the mean (across 8 phone configurations) of the standard deviation of execution times (for 10 runs per each phone configuration) is 7.79h for AF and 5.21h for BxT. Despite this fact, AF and BxT could crash the application consistently: the mean of the precision (fraction of the 10 runs that results in a crash) is 74% for AF and 69% for BxT.