2020•Unpublished venueRequires access

An empirical study of automatically-generated tests from the perspective of test smells

Tássio Virgínio, Luana Martins, Larissa Rocha Soares, Railana Santana, Heitor Augustus Xavier Costa, Ivan Machado

Open publisher page 23 citations

Abstract

Developing test code can be as or more expensive than developing production code. Commonly, developers use automated unit test generators to speed up software testing. The purpose of such tools is to shorten production time without decreasing code quality. Nonetheless, unit tests usually do not have a quality check layer above testing code, which might be hard to guarantee the quality of the generated tests. A strategy to verify the tests quality is to analyze the presence of test smells in test code. Test smells are characteristics in the test code that possibly indicate weaknesses in test design and implementation. Their presence could be used as a quality indicator. In this paper, we present an empirical study to analyze the quality of unit test code generated by automated test tools. We compare the tests generated by two tools (Randoop and Evo- Suite) with the existing unit test suite of twenty-one open-source Java projects. We analyze the unit test code to detect the presence of nineteen types of test smells. The results indicated significant differences in the unit test quality when comparing data from the automated unit test generators and existing unit test suites.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Developing test code can be as or more expensive than developing production code. Commonly, developers use automated unit test generators to speed up software testing. The purpose of such tools is to shorten production time without decreasing code quality. Nonetheless, unit tests usually do not have a quality check layer above testing code, which might be hard to guarantee the quality of the generated tests. A strategy to verify the tests quality is to analyze the presence of test smells in test code. Test smells are characteristics in the test code that possibly indicate weaknesses in test design and implementation. Their presence could be used as a quality indicator. In this paper, we present an empirical study to analyze the quality of unit test code generated by automated test tools. We compare the tests generated by two tools (Randoop and Evo- Suite) with the existing unit test suite of twenty-one open-source Java projects. We analyze the unit test code to detect the presence of nineteen types of test smells. The results indicated significant differences in the unit test quality when comparing data from the automated unit test generators and existing unit test suites.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 23 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Developing test code can be as or more expensive than developing production code. Commonly, developers use automated unit test generators to speed up software testing. The purpose of such tools is to shorten production time without decreasing code quality. Nonetheless, unit tests usually do not have a quality check layer above testing code, which might be hard to guarantee the quality of the generated tests. A strategy to verify the tests quality is to analyze the presence of test smells in test code. Test smells are characteristics in the test code that possibly indicate weaknesses in test design and implementation. Their presence could be used as a quality indicator. In this paper, we present an empirical study to analyze the quality of unit test code generated by automated test tools. We compare the tests generated by two tools (Randoop and Evo- Suite) with the existing unit test suite of twenty-one open-source Java projects. We analyze the unit test code to detect the presence of nineteen types of test smells. The results indicated significant differences in the unit test quality when comparing data from the automated unit test generators and existing unit test suites.

Key concepts: Test suite, Unit testing, Test Management Approach, Computer science, Test harness, Code coverage, Test script, Test (biology)

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
An empirical study of automatically-generated tests from the perspective of test smells — Research Paper | ScholarLens