The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Survey on Metamorphic Testing
Open accessAbstract
A test oracle determines whether a test execution reveals a fault, often by comparing the observed program output to the expected output. This is not always practical, for example when a program's input-output relation is complex and difficult to capture formally. Metamorphic testing provides an alternative, where correctness is not determined by checking an individual concrete output, but by applying a transformation to a test input and observing how the program output “morphs” into a different one as a result. Since the introduction of such metamorphic relations in 1998, many contributions on metamorphic testing have been made, and the technique has seen successful applications in a variety of domains, ranging from web services to computer graphics. This article provides a comprehensive survey on metamorphic testing: It summarises the research results and application areas, and analyses common practice in empirical studies of metamorphic testing as well as the main open challenges.
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
Self-testing/correcting with applications to numerical problems
Blum, M., Luby, M., & Rubinfeld, R. (1993) · Journal of Computer and System Sciences · doi:10.1016/0022-0000(93)90044-w · Cited by 712
On testing non-testable programs
Weyuker, E. J. (1982) · The Computer Journal · doi:10.1093/comjnl/25.4.465 · Cited by 606
Compiler validation via equivalence modulo inputs
Le, V., Afshari, M., & Su, Z. (2014) · Proceedings of the 35th ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation · doi:10.1145/2594291.2594334 · Cited by 388
Analyzing the past to prepare for the future
(2002) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.5555/2017160.2017162 · Cited by 179
Metamorphic testing for software quality assessment: A study of search engines
Zhou, Z. Q., Xiang, S., & Chen, T. Y. (2016) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.2015.2478001 · Cited by 163
Cited by
Beyond accuracy: behavioral testing of NLP models with CheckList
Ribeiro, M. T., Wu, T., Guestrin, C., & Singh, S. (2020) · Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.442 · Cited by 890
Zhang, M., Zhang, Y., Zhang, L., Liu, C., & Khurshid, S. (2018) · Proceedings of the 33rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Automated Software Engineering · doi:10.1145/3238147.3238187 · Cited by 611
Giray, G. (2021) · Journal of Systems and Software · doi:10.1016/j.jss.2021.111031 · Cited by 187
Big Data Systems: A Software Engineering Perspective
Davoudian, A., & Liu, M. (2021) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3408314 · Cited by 88
Validating SMT solvers via semantic fusion
Winterer, D., Zhang, C., & Su, Z. (2020) · Proceedings of the 41st ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation · doi:10.1145/3385412.3385985 · Cited by 82
Metadata
- Authors
- Segura, S., Fraser, G., Sanchez, A. B., & Ruiz-Cortes, A.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
- Published
- 2016-09-01
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 805-824
- ISSN
- 0098-5589 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-3520
- OpenAlex
- W2324595780
- Cited by
- 563
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 127.86
- Type
- journal article
- 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: A Survey on Metamorphic Testing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tse.2016.2532875
- The paper
- Segura, S., Fraser, G., Sanchez, A. B., & Ruiz-Cortes, A. (2016). A Survey on Metamorphic Testing. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1109/tse.2016.2532875
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.
