ArticleEmpirical software engineering2024
Semantic matching in GUI test reuse.
Article in Empirical software engineering, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Reusing test cases across apps that share similar functionalities reduces both the effort required to produce useful test cases and the time to offer reliable apps to the market. The main approaches to reuse test cases across apps combine different semantic matching and test generation algorithms to migrate test cases across Android apps. In this paper we define a general framework to evaluate the impact and effectiveness of different choices of semantic matching with Test Reuse approaches on migrating test cases across Android apps. We offer a thorough comparative evaluation of the many possible choices for the components of test migration processes. We propose an approach that combines the most effective choices for each component of the test migration process to obtain an effective approach. We report the results of an experimental evaluation on 8,099 GUI events from 337 test configurations. The results attest the prominent impact of semantic matching on test reuse. They indicate that sentence level perform better than word level embedding techniques. They surprisingly suggest a negligible impact of the corpus of documents used for building the word embedding model for the Semantic Matching Algorithm. They provide evidence that semantic matching of events of selected types perform better than semantic matching of events of all types. They show that the effectiveness of overall Test Reuse approach depends on the characteristics of the test suites and apps. The replication package that we make publicly available online (https://star.inf.usi.ch/#/software-data/11) allows researchers and practitioners to refine the results with additional experiments and evaluate other choices for test reuse components.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.