evaluating testing methods by delivered reliability n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Evaluating Testing Methods by Delivered Reliability PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Evaluating Testing Methods by Delivered Reliability

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 13

Evaluating Testing Methods by Delivered Reliability - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 106 Views
  • Uploaded on

Evaluating Testing Methods by Delivered Reliability. Frankl, Hamlet, Littlewood, Strigini IEEE TOSE Aug98. 841fall06 exam1 question 1. (25 pts) Calculations – given the following table, estimate the E(Q) using the MFR est and the subdomain formula.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Evaluating Testing Methods by Delivered Reliability' - rene


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
evaluating testing methods by delivered reliability
841f07frankl12oct2

Evaluating Testing Methods by Delivered Reliability

Frankl, Hamlet, Littlewood, Strigini

IEEE TOSE Aug98

841fall06 exam1 question 1
841fall06 exam1 question 1
  • (25 pts) Calculations – given the following table, estimate the E(Q) using
  • the MFR est and the subdomain formula.
  • Assume that subdomains a and c are twice as likely as the other
  • subdomains.
  • You can simplify the table by projections” on each axis.
  • Show your work. State and justify any assumptions that you must make.
841fall06 exam1 question 2a
841fall06 exam1 question 2a

2. (30 pts) Modeling

Assume that boundary testing randomly picks 2 test cases from

each subset that makes the two sides in a relational expression equal

(e.g. if the decision was “x < y”, the set would be those points where

the value of x was equal to the value of y.}

Boundary testing for the whole program will do this for

each relational expression.

Use Frankl’s formulas to estimate the E(Q) for this approach.

841f06 exam1 question 2b
841f06 exam1 question 2b

Consider the following program. Assume the operation profile is uniform and consists of all pairs of integers between 1 and 5.

E.g. (1,1) , (1,2), etc

cin >> a >> b;

out = “X”;

if (a > b + 1) out = “Y”;

if (a < 2*b ) out = “Z”;

cout<< out;

Seed two faults:

Change “b+1” to “b+2”

Change “2*b” to “b”

841f06 exam1 question 3
841f06 exam1 question 3
  • 3. (30 pts) Analysis
  • Consider the following code. Find the largest set of mutually exclusive
  • subdomains that might be useful for thorough testing of the code.
  • Justify why they would be useful. Express the sets with relational
  • conditions on a and b and draw a 2D map of the subdomains.
  • Consider these three faults: 1) change “b+3” to “b+2” ;
  • 2) change “a<b” to “a>b” ; 3) change “a+2” to “a+3”
  • Can these subdomains reveal these faults?
      • cin >> a >> b;
      • out = “X”;
      • if (a > b + 3) out = “Y”;
      • a = a + 2;
      • if (a < b ) out = “Z”;
      • cout<< out;
841f06 exam1 question 4
841f06 exam1 question 4

4. (15 pts) Discussion

Suppose that your testing effort is restricted to n tests and you

have identified 2*n important subdomains in the product.

How do you decide which subdomains to test?

Can you use seeded faults to help select?

What faults would you seed?

triangle example
841f07frankl12oct2Triangle Example

cin >> a >> b >> c ;

type = “scalene”;

if (a == b || a == c || b == c) type= “isosceles”;

if (a == b && a == c) type = “equilateral”;

if (a >= b+c || b >= a+c || c >= a+b) type=“not a triangle”;

if (a <= 0 || b <= 0 || c <= 0) type=“bad input”;

cout<< type;

slide10

TriangleDomain all combinations of integers 0 – 5Faults flt 1 - line 3: change a==b to a==a flt 2 – line 4: change “equilateral” to “isosceles” flt 3 – line 5: change a >= to a> flt 4 – line 5: change a+b to b+b

types of testing
841f07frankl12oct2

What subdomains?

Boundary testing?

Types of testing
for tuesday oct 2
841f07frankl12oct2For Tuesday, Oct 2

Failure sets for triangle and faults 1-4

empirical tool
841f07frankl12oct2Empirical Tool

For Tues, Oct 9

Use your empirical tool to calculate E(theta) for subdomain testing of the triangle problem with the given faults shown in lecture 11 and 12.

Compare with Frankl’s formulas. Make the comparision as fair as possible. Choose the number of tests and subdomains carefully

Turn in hardcopy at start of class, Tues 10/9