Paper detail

A Replication Study on Predicting Metamorphic Relations at Unit Testing Level

Metamorphic Testing (MT) addresses the test oracle problem by examining the relations between inputs and outputs of test executions. Such relations are known as Metamorphic Relations (MRs). In current practice, identifying and selecting suitable MRs is usually a challenging manual task, requiring a thorough grasp of the SUT and its application domain. Thus, Kanewala et al. proposed the Predicting Metamorphic Relations (PMR) approach to automatically suggest MRs from a list of six pre-defined MRs for testing newly developed methods. PMR is based on a classification model trained on features extracted from the control-flow graph (CFG) of 100 Java methods. In our replication study, we explore the generalizability of PMR. First, we rebuild the entire preprocessing and training pipeline and repeat the original study in a close replication to verify the reported results and establish the basis for further experiments. Second, we perform a conceptual replication to explore the reusability of the PMR model trained on CFGs from Java methods in the first step for functionally identical methods implemented in Python and C++. Finally, we retrain the model on the CFGs from the Python and C++ methods to investigate the dependence on programming language and implementation details. We were able to successfully replicate the original study achieving comparable results for the Java methods set. However, the prediction performance of the Java-based classifiers significantly decreases when applied to functionally equivalent Python and C++ methods despite using only CFG features to abstract from language details. Since the performance improved again when the classifiers were retrained on the CFGs of the methods written in Python and C++, we conclude that the PMR approach can be generalized, but only when classifiers are developed starting from code artefacts in the used programming language.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.