4.2 Article

An assessment of operational coverage as both an adequacy and a selection criterion for operational profile based testing

Journal

SOFTWARE QUALITY JOURNAL
Volume 26, Issue 4, Pages 1571-1594

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11219-017-9388-0

Keywords

Coverage testing; Operational coverage; Operational profile-based testing; Program Spectra; Relative coverage

Funding

  1. European Project ElasTest in the Horizon 2020 research and innovation program [731535]
  2. MIUR National Project GAUSS under the PRIN 2015 program [2015KWREMX]
  3. CAPES (Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel) [APQ-0826-1.03/16, BCT-0204-1.03/17]
  4. FACEPE (Foundation for Science and Technology Development of the State of Pernambuco) [APQ-0826-1.03/16, BCT-0204-1.03/17]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

While the relation between code coverage measures and fault detection is actively studied, only few works have investigated the correlation between measures of coverage and of reliability. In this work, we introduce a novel approach to measuring code coverage, called the operational coverage, that takes into account how much the program's entities are exercised so to reflect the profile of usage into the measure of coverage. Operational coverage is proposed as (i) an adequacy criterion, i.e., to assess the thoroughness of a black box test suite derived from the operational profile, and as (ii) a selection criterion, i.e., to select test cases for operational profile-based testing. Our empirical evaluation showed that operational coverage is better correlated than traditional coverage with the probability that the next test case derived according to the user's profile will not fail. This result suggests that our approach could provide a good stopping rule for operational profile-based testing. With respect to test case selection, our investigations revealed that operational coverage outperformed the traditional one in terms of test suite size and fault detection capability when we look at the average results.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available