State coverage: a structural test adequacy criterion for behavior checking

Authors:
Ken Koster;David Kao
Affiliations:
Agitar Software Laboratories, Mountain View, California;Agitar Software Laboratories, Mountain View, California
Venue:
The 6th Joint Meeting on European software engineering conference and the ACM SIGSOFT symposium on the foundations of software engineering: companion papers
Year:
2007

Citing 11
Cited 0

Selecting Software Test Data Using Data Flow Information

IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
Software unit test coverage and adequacy

ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR)
Effective unit testing

Ubiquity
An axiomatic basis for computer programming

Communications of the ACM
Kent Beck's Guide to Better Smalltalk

Kent Beck's Guide to Better Smalltalk
Program slicing

ICSE '81 Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Software engineering
A Survey on Testing and Reuse

SWSTE '03 Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Software-Science, Technology & Engineering
MuJava: an automated class mutation system: Research Articles

Software Testing, Verification & Reliability
A Survey of Unit Testing Practices

IEEE Software
Hints on Test Data Selection: Help for the Practicing Programmer

Computer
Testing Programs with the Aid of a Compiler

IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

We propose a new language-independent, structural test adequacy criterion called state coverage. State coverage measures whether unit-level tests check the outputs and side effects of a program. State coverage differs in several respects from existing test adequacy criteria, such as code coverage and mutation adequacy. Unlike other coverage-based criteria, state coverage measures the extent of checks of program behavior. And unlike existing fault-based criteria such as mutation adequacy, state coverage has been designed to be readily automated and to present users with easily understood test inadequacy reports. An experiment showed strong positive correlations between the number of behavior checks and both state coverage and mutation adequacy.