LTM: Scalable and Black-box Similarity-based Test Suite Minimization based on Language Models

April 03, 2023 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Rongqi Pan, Taher A. Ghaleb, Lionel Briand arXiv ID 2304.01397 Category cs.SE: Software Engineering Citations 7 Venue IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
Test suites tend to grow when software evolves, making it often infeasible to execute all test cases with the allocated testing budgets, especially for large software systems. Test suite minimization (TSM) is employed to improve the efficiency of software testing by removing redundant test cases, thus reducing testing time and resources, while maintaining the fault detection capability of the test suite. Most existing TSM approaches rely on code coverage (white-box) or model-based features, which are not always available to test engineers. Recent TSM approaches that rely only on test code (black-box) have been proposed, such as ATM and FAST-R. To address the scalability, we propose LTM (Language model-based Test suite Minimization), a novel, scalable, and black-box similarity-based TSM approach based on large language models (LLMs), which is the first application of LLMs in the context of TSM. To support similarity measurement for test code embeddings, we investigate five pre-trained language models: CodeBERT, GraphCodeBERT, UniXcoder, StarEncoder, and CodeLlama, on which we compute two similarity measures: Cosine Similarity and Euclidean Distance. Our goal is to find similarity measures that are not only computationally more efficient but can also better guide a Genetic Algorithm (GA) to search for optimal minimized test suites, thus reducing the overall search time. Experimental results show that the best configuration of LTM (UniXcoder/Cosine) outperforms ATM in three aspects: (a) achieving a slightly greater saving rate of testing time (41.72% versus 41.02%, on average); (b) attaining a significantly higher fault detection rate (0.84 versus 0.81, on average); and, most importantly, (c) minimizing test suites nearly five times faster on average, with higher gains for larger test suites and systems, thus achieving much higher scalability.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Software Engineering

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted