Paper detail

Detection of Coincidentally Correct Test Cases through Random Forests

The performance of coverage-based fault localization greatly depends on the quality of test cases being executed. These test cases execute some lines of the given program and determine whether the underlying tests are passed or failed. In particular, some test cases may be well-behaved (i.e., passed) while executing faulty statements. These test cases, also known as coincidentally correct test cases, may negatively influence the performance of the spectra-based fault localization and thus be less helpful as a tool for the purpose of automated debugging. In other words, the involvement of these coincidentally correct test cases may introduce noises to the fault localization computation and thus cause in divergence of effectively localizing the location of possible bugs in the given code. In this paper, we propose a hybrid approach of ensemble learning combined with a supervised learning algorithm namely, Random Forests (RF) for the purpose of correctly identifying test cases that are mislabeled to be the passing test cases. A cost-effective analysis of flipping the test status or trimming (i.e., eliminating from the computation) the coincidental correct test cases is also reported.

preprint2020arXivOpen 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.