This Article 
   
 Share 
   
 Bibliographic References 
   
 Add to: 
 
Digg
Furl
Spurl
Blink
Simpy
Google
Del.icio.us
Y!MyWeb
 
 Search 
   
On the Expected Number of Failures Detected by Subdomain Testing and Random Testing
February 1996 (vol. 22 no. 2)
pp. 109-119

Abstract—In this paper, we investigate the efficacy of subdomain testing and random testing using the expected number of failures detected (the E-measure) as a measure of effectiveness. Simple as it is, the E-measure does provide a great deal of useful information about the fault-detecting capability of testing strategies. With the E-measure, we obtain new characterizations of subdomain testing, including several new conditions that determine whether subdomain testing is more or less effective than random testing. Previously, the efficacy of subdomain testing strategies has been analyzed using the probability of detecting at least one failure (the P-measure) for the special case of disjoint subdomains only. On the contrary, our analysis makes use of the E-measure and considers also the general case in which subdomains may or may not overlap. Furthermore, we discover important relations between the two different measures. From these relations, we also derive corresponding characterizations of subdomain testing in terms of the P-measure.

[1] T.Y. Chen and J.Q. Mao, "On data flow testing strategy," Proc. Second Int'l Conf. Software Quality Management, pp. 299-309, July 1994.
[2] T. Chen and Y. Yu, “On the Relationship Between Partition and Random Testing,” IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol. 20, no. 12, pp. 977-980, Dec. 1994.
[3] T. Chen and Y. Yu, “A More General Sufficient Condition for Partition Testing to be Better than Random Testing,” Information Processing Letters, vol. 57, no. 3, pp. 145-149, 1996.
[4] R. Cobb and H. Mills, “Engineering Software Under Statistical Quality Control,” IEEE Software, pp. 44-54, Nov. 1990.
[5] J.W. Duran and S.C. Ntafos, "An evaluation of random testing," IEEE Trans. Software Engineering, vol. 10, pp. 438-444, July 1984.
[6] P.G. Frankl and E.J. Weyuker,“A formal analysis of the fault-detecting ability of testing methods,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 19, no. 3, Mar. 1993, pp. 202-213,
[7] P.G. Frankl and E.J. Weyuker,“Provable improvements on branch testing,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 19, no. 10, Oct. 1993, pp. 962-975.
[8] E. Girard and J.-C. Rault, "A programming technique for software reliability," Proc. IEEE Symp. Computer Software Reliability, pp. 44-50, 1973.
[9] D. Hamlet and R. Taylor, "Partition Testing Does Not Inspire Confidence," IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol. 16, pp. 1,402-1,412, Dec. 1990.
[10] I.J. Hayes, "Specification directed module testing," IEEE Trans. Software Engineering, vol. 12, pp. 124-133, Jan. 1986.
[11] T. Higashino and G. Bochmann, Automatic Analysis and Test Case Derivation for a Restricted Class of LOTOS Expressions with Data Parameters IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 29-42, Jan. 1994.
[12] J.W. Laski and B. Korel, "A data flow oriented program testing strategy," IEEE Trans. Software Engineering, vol. 9, pp. 347-354, May 1983.
[13] G. Luo, A. Das, and G.v. Bochmann, "Software testing based on SDL specifications with save," IEEE Trans. Software Engineering, vol. 20, pp. 72-87, Jan. 1994.
[14] G.J. Myers,The Art of Software Testing.New York: Wiley, 1979.
[15] S. Rapps and E.J. Weyuker, “Selecting Software Test Data Using Data Flow Information,” IEEE Trans. Software Eng., vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 367–375, Apr. 1985.
[16] I. Sommerville, Software Engineering, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1989.
[17] E.J. Weyuker and B. Jeng,“Analyzing partition testing strategies,” IEEE Trans. Software Engineering, vol. 17, pp. 703-711, 1991.
[18] L.J. White and E.I. Cohen, "A domain strategy for computer program testing," IEEE Trans. Software Engineering, vol. 6, pp. 247-257, May 1980.

Index Terms:
Partition testing, random testing, software testing, subdomain testing.
Citation:
Tsong Yueh Chen, Yuen Tak Yu, "On the Expected Number of Failures Detected by Subdomain Testing and Random Testing," IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 109-119, Feb. 1996, doi:10.1109/32.485221
Usage of this product signifies your acceptance of the Terms of Use.