Search‐based unit test generation, if effective at fault detection, can lower the cost of testing. Such techniques rely on fitness functions to guide the search. Ultimately, such functions represent test goals that approximate—but do not ensure—fault detection. The need to rely on approximations leads to two questions—
Learning How to Search: Generating Exception-Triggering Tests Through Adaptive Fitness Function Selection
Search-based test generation is guided by feedback from one or more fitness functions—scoring functions that judge solution optimality. Choosing informative fitness functions is crucial to meeting the goals of a tester. Unfortunately, many goals—such as forcing the class-under-test to throw exceptions— do not have a known fitness function formulation. We propose that meeting such goals requires treating fitness function identification as a secondary optimization step. An adaptive algorithm that can vary the selection of fitness functions could adjust its selection throughout the generation process to maximize goal attainment, based on the current population of test suites. To test this hypothesis, we have implemented two reinforcement learning algorithms in the EvoSuite framework, and used these algorithms to dynamically set the fitness functions used during generation.
We have evaluated our framework, EvoSuiteFIT, on a set of 386 real faults. EvoSuiteFIT discovers and retains more exception-triggering input and produces suites that detect a variety of faults missed by the other techniques. The ability to adjust fitness functions allows EvoSuiteFIT to make strategic choices that efficiently produce more effective test suites.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1657299
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10142866
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- 13th IEEE International Conference on Software Testing, Validation and Verification
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
Summary can fitness functions produce effective tests and, if so, which should be used to generate tests? To answer these questions, we have assessed the fault‐detection capabilities of unit test suites generated to satisfy eight white‐box fitness functions on 597 real faults from the Defects4J database. Our analysis has found that the strongest indicators of effectiveness are a high level of code coverage over the targeted class and high satisfaction of a criterion's obligations. Consequently, the branch coverage fitness function is the most effective. Our findings indicate that fitness functions that thoroughly explore system structure should be used as primary generation objectives—supported by secondary fitness functions that explore orthogonal, supporting scenarios. Our results also provide further evidence that future approaches to test generation should focus on attaining higher coverage of private code and better initialization and manipulation of class dependencies. -
The problem of automatic software generation has been referred to as machine programming. In this work, we propose a framework based on genetic algorithms to help make progress in this domain. Although genetic algorithms (GAs) have been successfully used for many problems, one criticism is that hand-crafting GAs fitness function, the test that aims to effectively guide its evolution, can be notably challenging. Our framework presents a novel approach to learn the fitness function using neural networks to predict values of ideal fitness functions.We also augment the evolutionary process with a minimally intrusive search heuristic. This heuristic improves the framework’s ability to discover correct programs from ones that are approximately correct and does so with negligible computational overhead. We compare our approach with several state-of-the-art program synthesis methods and demonstrate that it finds more correct programs with fewer candidate program generations.more » « less
-
A number of criteria have been proposed to judge test suite adequacy. While search-based test generation has improved greatly at criteria coverage, the produced suites are still often ineffective at detecting faults. Efficacy may be limited by the single-minded application of one criterion at a time when generating suites - a sharp contrast to human testers, who simultaneously explore multiple testing strategies. We hypothesize that automated generation can be improved by selecting and simultaneously exploring multiple criteria. To address this hypothesis, we have generated multi-criteria test suites, measuring efficacy against the Defects4J fault database. We have found that multi-criteria suites can be up to 31.15% more effective at detecting complex, real-world faults than suites generated to satisfy a single criterion and 70.17% more effective than the default combination of all eight criteria. Given a fixed search budget, we recommend pairing a criterion focused on structural exploration - such as Branch Coverage - with targeted supplemental strategies aimed at the type of faults expected from the system under test. Our findings offer lessons to consider when selecting such combinations.more » « less
-
While adequacy criteria offer an end-point for testing, they do not mandate how targets are covered. Branch Coverage may be attained through direct calls to methods, or through indirect calls between methods. Automated generation is biased towards the rapid gains offered by indirect coverage. Therefore, even with the same end-goal, humans and automation produce very different tests. Direct coverage may yield tests that are more understandable, and that detect faults missed by traditional approaches. However, the added burden for the generation framework may result in lower coverage and faults that emerge through method interactions may be missed. To compare the two approaches, we have generated test suites for both, judging efficacy against real faults. We have found that requiring direct coverage results in lower achieved coverage and likelihood of fault detection. However, both forms of Branch Coverage cover code and detect faults that the other does not. By isolating methods, Direct Branch Coverage is less constrained in the choice of input. However, traditional Branch Coverage is able to leverage method interactions to discover faults. Ultimately, both are situationally applicable within the context of a broader testing strategy.more » « less
-
more » « less
Abstract Many problems in science and technology require finding global minima or maxima of complicated objective functions. The importance of global optimization has inspired the development of numerous heuristic algorithms based on analogies with physical, chemical or biological systems. Here we present a novel algorithm, SmartRunner, which employs a Bayesian probabilistic model informed by the history of accepted and rejected moves to make an informed decision about the next random trial. Thus, SmartRunner intelligently adapts its search strategy to a given objective function and moveset, with the goal of maximizing fitness gain (or energy loss) per function evaluation. Our approach is equivalent to adding a simple adaptive penalty to the original objective function, with SmartRunner performing hill ascent on the modified landscape. The adaptive penalty can be added to many other global optimization schemes, enhancing their ability to find high-quality solutions. We have explored SmartRunner’s performance on a standard set of test functions, the Sherrington–Kirkpatrick spin glass model, and Kauffman’s NK fitness model, finding that it compares favorably with several widely-used alternative approaches to gradient-free optimization.
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- The DOI is not currently available.
