Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 27Software Engineering ResearchSoftware Testing and Debugging TechniquesAlgorithms and Data Compression

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 39 of the 40 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Using entropy measures for comparison of software traces

Open access
Miranskyy, A.V., Davison, M., Reesor, R.M., Murtaza, S.S.·2012·Information Sciences

Abstract

The analysis of execution paths (also known as software traces) collected from a given software product can help in a number of areas including software testing, software maintenance and program comprehension. The lack of a scalable matching algorithm operating on detailed execution paths motivates the search for an alternative solution. This paper proposes the use of word entropies for the classification of software traces. Using a well-studied defective software as an example, we investigate the application of both Shannon and extended entropies (Landsberg-Vedral, Renyi and Tsallis) to the classification of traces related to various software defects. Our study shows that using entropy measures for comparisons gives an efficient and scalable method for comparing traces. The three extended entropies, with parameters chosen to emphasize rare events, all perform similarly and are superior to the Shannon entropy.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ins.2012.03.017

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. A.V. Miranskyy, M.S. Gittens, N.H. Madhavji, C.A. Taylor, Usage of long execution sequences for test case prioritization, in: Supplemental Proceedings of the 18th IEEE International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering, 2007.
  2. Yin, 2003, vol. 5

Cited by

See all 27

Metadata

Authors
Miranskyy, A. V., Davison, M., Reesor, R. M., & Murtaza, S. S.
Affiliations
Western University (CA)
Corresponding author
Miranskyy, A.V.
Venue
Information Sciences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-10
Volume
203
Pages
59-72
ISSN
0020-0255 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1970716157
Cited by
27
References
40
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
FWCI
6.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Information Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Research
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Software › Software Testing and Debugging Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Theoretical Computer Science › Algorithms and Data Compression
Keywords
execution paths, entropy measures, trace classification, software defects, Shannon entropy, Rényi entropy, Tsallis entropy, rare events, software testing

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

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.