The DOI matches its Crossref record; 20 of the 20 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Combination testing strategies: a survey
Abstract
Combination strategies are test case selection methods that identify test cases by combining values of the different test object input parameters based on some combinatorial strategy. This survey presents 16 different combination strategies, covering more than 40 papers that focus on one or several combination strategies. This collection represents most of the existing work performed on combination strategies. This survey describes the basic algorithms used by the combination strategies. Some properties of combination strategies, including coverage criteria and theoretical bounds on the size of test suites, are also included in this description. This survey paper also includes a subsumption hierarchy that attempts to relate the various coverage criteria associated with the identified combination strategies. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
(1998) · PDCA/Test · doi:10.1201/9781420048131.axh · Cited by 1,900
Coward, P. D. (1990) · The Software Life Cycle · doi:10.1016/b978-0-408-03741-9.50028-3 · Cited by 1,290
Selecting Software Test Data Using Data Flow Information
Rapps, S., & Weyuker, E. J. (1985) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.1985.232226 · Cited by 1,075
The category-partition method for specifying and generating functional tests
Ostrand, T. J., & Balcer, M. J. (1988) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/62959.62964 · Cited by 791
Software fault interactions and implications for software testing
Kuhn, D. R., Wallace, D. R., & Gallo, A. M. (2004) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.2004.24 · Cited by 789
An Evaluation of Random Testing
Duran, J. W., & Ntafos, S. C. (1984) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.1984.5010257 · Cited by 684
Comparing the Effectiveness of Software Testing Strategies
Basili, V. R., & Selby, R. W. (1987) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.1987.232881 · Cited by 483
Partition testing does not inspire confidence (program testing)
Hamlet, D., & Taylor, R. (1990) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/32.62448 · Cited by 400
0897915046/International Conference on Software Engineering
(1992) · doi:10.1145/143062 · Cited by 374
Cited by
A taxonomy of model‐based testing approaches
Utting, M., Pretschner, A., & Legeard, B. (2012) · Software Testing, Verification and Reliability · doi:10.1002/stvr.456 · Cited by 632
CarFast: achieving higher statement coverage faster
Park, S., Hossain, B. M. M., Hussain, I., Csallner, C., Grechanik, M., Taneja, K., Fu, C., & Xie, Q. (2012) · Proceedings of the ACM SIGSOFT 20th International Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering · doi:10.1145/2393596.2393636 · Cited by 55
Metadata
- Authors
- Grindal, M., Offutt, J., & Andler, S. F.
- Venue
- Software Testing, Verification and Reliability
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 167-199
- ISSN
- 0960-0833 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-1689
- OpenAlex
- W2139980321
- Cited by
- 425
- References
- 20
- FWCI
- 59.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Combination testing strategies: a survey. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/stvr.319
- The paper
- Grindal, M., Offutt, J., & Andler, S. F. (2005). Combination testing strategies: a survey. Software Testing, Verification and Reliability. https://doi.org/10.1002/stvr.319
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
