An official website of the United States government
The large demand of mobile devices creates significant concerns about the quality of mobile applications (apps). Developers need to guarantee the quality of mobile apps before it is released to the market. There have been many approaches using different strategies to test the GUI of mobile apps. However, they still need improvement due to their limited effectiveness. In this article, we propose DinoDroid, an approach based on deep Q-networks to automate testing of Android apps. DinoDroid learns a behavior model from a set of existing apps and the learned model can be used to explore and generate tests for new apps. DinoDroid is able to capture the fine-grained details of GUI events (e.g., the content of GUI widgets) and use them as features that are fed into deep neural network, which acts as the agent to guide app exploration. DinoDroid automatically adapts the learned model during the exploration without the need of any modeling strategies or pre-defined rules. We conduct experiments on 64 open-source Android apps. The results showed that DinoDroid outperforms existing Android testing tools in terms of code coverage and bug detection.
more »
« less
Configurations in Android testing: They Matter
Android has rocketed to the top of the mobile market thanks in large part to its open source model. Vendors use Android for their devices for free, and companies make customizations to suit their needs. This has resulted in a myriad of configurations that are extant in the user space today. In this paper, we show that differences in configurations, if ignored, can lead to differences in test outputs and code coverage. Consequently, researchers who develop new testing techniques and evaluate them on only one or two configurations are missing a necessary dimension in their experiments and developers who ignore this may release buggy software. In a large study on 18 apps across 88 configurations, we show that only one of the 18 apps studied showed no variation at all. The rest showed variation in either, or both, code coverage and test results. 15% of the 2,000 plus test cases across all of the apps vary, and some of the variation is subtle, i.e. not just a test crash. Our results suggest that configurations in Android testing do matter and that developers need to test using configuration-aware techniques.
more »
« less
- PAR ID:
- 10097971
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Advances in Mobile App Analysis - A-Mobile 2018
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 1 to 6
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
The test suites of an Android app should take advantage of different types of tests including end-to-end tests, which validate user flows, and unit tests, which provide focused executions for debugging. App developers have two main options when creating unit tests: create unit tests that run on a device (either physical or emulated) or create unit tests that run on a development machine’s Java Virtual Machine (JVM). Unit tests that run on a device are not really focused, as they use the full implementation of the Android framework. Moreover, they are fairly slow to execute, requiring the Android system as the runtime. Unit tests that run on the JVM, instead, are more focused and run more efficiently but require developers to suitably handle the coupling between the app under test and the Android framework. To help developers in creating focused unit tests that run on the JVM, we propose a novel technique called ARTISAN based on the idea of test carving. The technique (i) traces the app execution during end-to-end testing on Android devices, (ii) identifies focal methods to test, (iii) carves the necessary preconditions for testing those methods, (iv) creates suitable test doubles for the Android framework, and (v) synthesizes executable unit tests that can run on the JVM. We evaluated ARTISAN using 152 end-to-end tests from five apps and observed that ARTISAN can generate unit tests that cover a significant portion of the code exercised by the end-to-end tests (i.e., 45% of the starting statement coverage on average) and does so in a few minutes.more » « less
-
Continuous integration (CI) has become a popular method for automating code changes, testing, and software project delivery. However, sufficient testing prior to code submission is crucial to prevent build breaks. Additionally, testing must provide developers with quick feedback on code changes, which requires fast testing times. While regression test selection (RTS) has been studied to improve the cost-effectiveness of regression testing for lower-level tests (i.e., unit tests), it has not been applied to the testing of user interfaces (UI) in application domains such as mobile apps. UI testing at the UI level requires different techniques such as impact analysis and automated test execution. In this paper, we examine the use of RTS in CI settings for UI testing across various open-source mobile apps. Our analysis focuses on using Frequency Analysis to understand the need for RTS, Cost Analysis to evaluate the cost of impact analysis and test case selection algorithms, and Test Reuse Analysis to determine the reusability of UI test sequences for automation. The insights from this study will guide practitioners and researchers in developing advanced RTS techniques that can be adapted to CI environments for mobile apps.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Despite over a decade of research, it is still challenging for mobile UI testing tools to achieve satisfactory effectiveness, especially on industrial apps with rich features and large code bases. Our experiences suggest that existing mobile UI testing tools are prone to exploration tarpits, where the tools get stuck with a small fraction of app functionalities for an extensive amount of time. For example, a tool logs out an app at early stages without being able to log back in, and since then the tool gets stuck with exploring the app's pre-login functionalities (i.e., exploration tarpits) instead of its main functionalities. While tool vendors/users can manually hardcode rules for the tools to avoid specific exploration tarpits, these rules can hardly generalize, being fragile in face of diverted testing environments and fast app iterations. To identify and resolve exploration tarpits, we propose VET, a general approach including a supporting system for the given specific Android UI testing tool on the given specific app under test (AUT). VET runs the tool on the AUT for some time and records UI traces, based on which VET identifies exploration tarpits by recognizing their patterns in the UI traces. VET then pinpoints the actions (e.g., clicking logout) or the screens that lead to or exhibit exploration tarpits. In subsequent test runs, VET guides the testing tool to prevent or recover from exploration tarpits. From our evaluation with state-of-the-art Android UI testing tools on popular industrial apps, VET identifies exploration tarpits that cost up to 98.6% testing time budget. These exploration tarpits reveal not only limitations in UI exploration strategies but also defects in tool implementations. VET automatically addresses the identified exploration tarpits, enabling each evaluated tool to achieve higher code coverage and improve crash-triggering capabilities.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Due to the importance of Android app quality assurance, many Android UI testing tools have been developed by researchers over the years. However, recent studies show that these tools typically achieve low code coverage on popular industrial apps. In fact, given a reasonable amount of run time, most state-of-the-art tools cannot even outperform a simple tool, Monkey, on popular industrial apps with large codebases and sophisticated functionalities. Our motivating study finds that these tools perform two types of operations, UI Hierarchy Capturing (capturing information about the contents on the screen) and UI Event Execution (executing UI events, such as clicks), often inefficiently using UIAutomator, a component of the Android framework. In total, these two types of operations use on average 70% of the given test time. Based on this finding, to improve the effectiveness of Android testing tools, we propose TOLLER, a tool consisting of infrastructure enhancements to the Android operating system. TOLLER injects itself into the same virtual machine as the app under test, giving TOLLER direct access to the app’s runtime memory. TOLLER is thus able to directly (1) access UI data structures, and thus capture contents on the screen without the overhead of invoking the Android framework services or remote procedure calls (RPCs), and (2) invoke UI event handlers without needing to execute the UI events. Compared with the often-used UIAutomator, TOLLER reduces average time usage of UI Hierarchy Capturing and UI Event Execution operations by up to 97% and 95%, respectively. We integrate TOLLER with existing state-of-the-art/practice Android UI testing tools and achieve the range of 11.8% to 70.1% relative code coverage improvement on average. We also find that TOLLER-enhanced tools are able to trigger 1.4x to 3.6x distinct crashes compared with their original versions without TOLLER enhancement. These improvements are so substantial that they also change the relative competitiveness of the tools under empirical comparison. Our findings highlight the practicality of TOLLER as well as raising the community awareness of infrastructure support’s significance beyond the community’s existing heavy focus on algorithms.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- https://doi.org/10.1145/3243218.3243219
