The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Eclat: Automatic Generation and Classification of Test Inputs
Open accessAbstract
This paper describes a technique that selects, from a large set of test inputs, a small subset likely to reveal faults in the software under test. The technique takes a program or software component, plus a set of correct executions — say, from observations of the software running properly, or from an existing test suite that a user wishes to enhance. The technique first infers an operational model of the software's operation. Then, inputs whose operational pattern of execution differs from the model in specific ways are suggestive of faults. These inputs are further reduced by selecting only one input per operational pattern. The result is a small portion of the original inputs, deemed by the technique as most likely to reveal faults. Thus, the technique can also be seen as an error-detection technique. The paper describes two additional techniques that complement test input selection. One is a technique for automatically producing an oracle (a set of assertions) for a test input from the operational model, thus transforming the test input into a test case. The other is a classification-guided test input generation technique that also makes use of operational models and patterns. When generating inputs, it filters out code sequences that are unlikely to contribute to legal inputs, improving the efficiency of its search for fault-revealing inputs. We have implemented these techniques in the Eclat tool, which generates unit tests for Java classes. Eclat's input is a set of classes to test and an example program execution—say, a passing test suite. Eclat's output is a set of JUnit test cases, each containing a potentially fault-revealing input and a set of assertions at least one of which fails. In our experiments, Eclat successfully generated inputs that exposed fault-revealing behavior; we have used Eclat to reveal real errors in programs. The inputs it selects as fault-revealing are an order of magnitude as likely to reveal a fault as all generated inputs.
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
JCrasher: an automatic robustness tester for Java
Csallner, C., & Smaragdakis, Y. (2004) · Software: Practice and Experience · doi:10.1002/spe.602 · Cited by 426
Cited by
The oracle problem in software testing: A survey
Barr, E. T., Harman, M., McMinn, P., Shahbaz, M., & Yoo, S. (2015) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.2014.2372785 · Cited by 1,104
Delta execution for efficient state-space exploration of object-oriented programs
d'Amorim, M., Lauterburg, S., & Marinov, D. (2007) · Proceedings of the 2007 international symposium on Software testing and analysis · doi:10.1145/1273463.1273472 · Cited by 26
Metadata
- Authors
- Pacheco, C., & Ernst, M. D.
- Venue
- Lecture Notes in Computer Science
- Publisher
- Springer Berlin Heidelberg
- Published
- 2005
- Pages
- 504-527
- ISSN
- 0302-9743 (ISSN-L)
- 1611-3349
- OpenAlex
- W2107751709
- Cited by
- 250
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 12.81
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Eclat: Automatic Generation and Classification of Test Inputs. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/11531142_22
- The paper
- Pacheco, C., & Ernst, M. D. (2005). Eclat: Automatic Generation and Classification of Test Inputs. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/11531142_22
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.