Bug还是不是Bug？分析蜕变关系违反背后的原因
Bug or not Bug? Analysing the Reasons Behind Metamorphic Relation Violations
AI总结：
本文针对蜕变测试中MR违反原因难以判断的问题，开发了一种利用关联规则挖掘（ARM）技术细化MR的方法，以区分违反是由Bug引起还是MR不匹配，并通过概念验证证明了该方法能有效加强回归测试的测试套件。
摘要：
蜕变测试（MT）是一种能有效缓解预言机问题的测试技术。MT使用蜕变关系（MRs）来确定测试用例是通过还是失败。MRs规定了在执行待测系统（SUT）时，输出应如何响应特定的输入变化而变化。如果某个特定的MR在至少一个测试输入（及其变化）下被违反，那么SUT存在故障的概率很高。另一方面，如果某个特定的MR没有被违反，这并不能保证SUT没有故障。然而，判断MR被违反是由于Bug还是因为MR对于特定输入生成的特定条件不成立或不适用，这仍然是一项手动且未被探索的任务。在本文中，我们开发了一种细化MR的方法，以提供关于违反是由于Bug引起还是由于MR在特定情况下与某些测试数据不匹配的提示。在我们的初始概念验证中，我们使用关联规则挖掘（ARM）技术从规则中提取相关信息。在我们的初始概念验证中，我们在一个简单示例上验证了我们的方法，并讨论了从实验中获得的经验教训。我们的概念验证表明我们的方法是适用的，并且我们可以提供建议来帮助加强用于回归测试目的的测试套件。
英文摘要：
Metamorphic Testing (MT) is a testing technique that can effectively alleviate the oracle problem. MT uses Metamorphic Relations (MRs) to determine if a test case passes or fails. MRs specify how the outputs should vary in response to specific input changes when executing the System Under Test (SUT). If a particular MR is violated for at least one test input (and its change), there is a high probability that the SUT has a fault. On the other hand, if a particular MR is not violated, it does not guarantee that the SUT is fault free. However, deciding if the MR is being violated due to a bug or because the MR does not hold/fit for particular conditions generated by specific inputs remains a manual task and unexplored. In this paper, we develop a method for refining MRs to offer hints as to whether a violation results from a bug or arises from the MR not being matched to certain test data under specific circumstances. In our initial proof-of-concept, we derive the relevant information from rules using the Association Rule Mining (ARM) technique. In our initial proof-of-concept, we validate our method on a toy example and discuss the lessons learned from our experiments. Our proof-of-concept demonstrates that our method is applicable and that we can provide suggestions that help strengthen the test suite for regression testing purposes.
机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来，可能存在错误，请以论文正文为准。
