An Empirical Evaluation of Manually Created Equivalent Mutants

April 14, 2024 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshops

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

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Philipp Straubinger, Alexander Degenhart, Gordon Fraser arXiv ID 2404.09241 Category cs.SE: Software Engineering Citations 0 Venue International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshops Last Checked 5 months ago
Abstract
Mutation testing consists of evaluating how effective test suites are at detecting artificially seeded defects in the source code, and guiding the improvement of the test suites. Although mutation testing tools are increasingly adopted in practice, equivalent mutants, i.e., mutants that differ only in syntax but not semantics, hamper this process. While prior research investigated how frequently equivalent mutants are produced by mutation testing tools and how effective existing methods of detecting these equivalent mutants are, it remains unclear to what degree humans also create equivalent mutants, and how well they perform at identifying these. We therefore study these questions in the context of Code Defenders, a mutation testing game, in which players competitively produce mutants and tests. Using manual inspection as well as automated identification methods we establish that less than 10 % of manually created mutants are equivalent. Surprisingly, our findings indicate that a significant portion of developers struggle to accurately identify equivalent mutants, emphasizing the need for improved detection mechanisms and developer training in mutation testing.
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