Paper detail

Smoke Testing for Machine Learning: Simple Tests to Discover Severe Defects

Machine learning is nowadays a standard technique for data analysis within software applications. Software engineers need quality assurance techniques that are suitable for these new kinds of systems. Within this article, we discuss the question whether standard software testing techniques that have been part of textbooks since decades are also useful for the testing of machine learning software. Concretely, we try to determine generic and simple smoke tests that can be used to assert that basic functions can be executed without crashing. We found that we can derive such tests using techniques similar to equivalence classes and boundary value analysis. Moreover, we found that these concepts can also be applied to hyperparameters, to further improve the quality of the smoke tests. Even though our approach is almost trivial, we were able to find bugs in all three machine learning libraries that we tested and severe bugs in two of the three libraries. This demonstrates that common software testing techniques are still valid in the age of machine learning and that considerations how they can be adapted to this new context can help to find and prevent severe bugs, even in mature machine learning libraries.

preprint2021arXivOpen 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.