CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 379Software Testing and Debugging TechniquesSoftware Engineering ResearchAdvanced Software Engineering Methodologies

The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year; the references it cites are not checked yet.

GUI ripping: reverse engineering of graphical user interfaces for testing

Memon, A., Banerjee, I., Nagarajan, A.·2004·10th Working Conference on Reverse Engineering, 2003. WCRE 2003. Proceedings.
DOI 10.1109/wcre.2003.1287256
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Graphical user interfaces (GUIs) are important parts of today’s software and their correct execution is required to ensure the correctness of the overall software. A popular technique to detect defects in GUIs is to test them by executing test cases and checking the execution results. Test cases may either be created manually or generated automatically from a model of the GUI. While manual testing is unacceptably slow for many applications, our experience with GUI testing has shown that creating a model that can be used for automated test case generation is difficult. We describe a new approach to reverse engineer a model represented as structures called a GUI forest, event-flow graphs and an integration tree directly from the executable GUI. We describe “GUI Ripping”, a dynamic process in which the software’s GUI is automatically “traversed ” by opening all its windows and extracting all their widgets (GUI objects), properties, and values. The extracted information is then verified by the test designer and used to automatically generate test cases. We present algorithms for the ripping process and describe their implementation in a tool suite that operates on Java and Microsoft Windows ’ GUIs. We present results of case studies which show that our approach requires very little human intervention and is especially useful for regression testing of software that is modified frequently. We have successfully used the “GUI Ripper” in several large experiments and have made it avai…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/wcre.2003.1287256

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Citations

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 32 · Cited by 379

Research works printed but not linked: 27

  1. memon, 2000, A planning-based approach to GUI testing, Proceedings of The 13th International Software/Internet Quality Week
  2. 10.1145/355045.355050 · DOI
  3. 10.1109/32.908959 · DOI
  4. 10.1109/ICSM.2003.1235451 · DOI
  5. 10.1145/302405.302632 · DOI
  6. 10.1109/MC.2002.1023795 · DOI
  7. 10.1016/S0065-2458(03)58004-4 · DOI
  8. 10.1109/52.646888 · DOI
  9. memon, 2001, A Comprehensive Framework for Testing Graphical User Interfaces
  10. 10.1145/503209.503244 · DOI
  11. 10.1109/32.908959 · DOI
  12. 10.1109/WCRE.1996.558844 · DOI
  13. poston, 1996, Automating Specification-Based Software Testing, IEEE Computer Society
  14. scheetz, 0, Generating Goal-oriented Test Cases
  15. scheetz, 2000, Generating test cases from an oo model with an ai planning system, Proceedings in the Twenty-third Annual International Computer Software and Applications Conference
  16. systa, 2001, Dynamic reverse engineering of Java software, Technical Report
  17. walworth, 1997, Java GUI testing, Dr Dobb's Journal of Software Tools, 22, 30
  18. beizer, 1999, Black-Box Testing Techniques for Functional Testing of Software and Systems
  19. 10.1007/978-1-4612-1526-4 · DOI
  20. hicinbothom, 1993, A tool for automatically generating transcripts of human-computer interaction, Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 37th Annual Meeting volume 2 of SPECIAL SESSIONS Demonstrations, 2, 1042, 10.1177/154193129303701514 · DOI
  21. anderson, 1993, Automating Requirements Engineering Using Artificial Intelligence Techniques
  22. fickas, 1991, A proposed perspective shift: Viewing specification design as a planning problem, Artificial Intelligence & Software Engineering, 535
  23. dwyer, 1997, Model checking graphical user interfaces using abstractions, ESEC/FSE '97 Volume 1301 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 1301, 244
  24. cormen, 2001, Introduction to Algorithms, 477
  25. 10.1109/HICSS.2001.927256 · DOI
  26. gerrard, 1997, Testing GUI applications, EuroSTAR
  27. foster, 1998, A visual test development environment for GUI systems, 11th International Software Quality Week

Metadata

Authors
Memon, A., Banerjee, I., & Nagarajan, A.
Affiliations
University of Maryland, College Park (US)
ORCID
Memon, A.
Venue
10th Working Conference on Reverse Engineering, 2003. WCRE 2003. Proceedings.
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2004-07-08
Pages
260-269
ISSN
1095-1350 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1109/wcre.2003.1287256
OpenAlex
W2172081876
Cited by
379
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 28 · 2015: 29 · 2014: 34 · 2013: 29 · 2012: 41
FWCI
7.02
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Working Conference on Reverse Engineering (WCRE) (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Software › Software Testing and Debugging Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Research
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Software › Advanced Software Engineering Methodologies
Keywords
GUI testing, automated test generation, regression testing, Java GUI

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: GUI ripping: reverse engineering of graphical user interfaces for testing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/wcre.2003.1287256
The paper
Memon, A., Banerjee, I., & Nagarajan, A. (2004). GUI ripping: reverse engineering of graphical user interfaces for testing. 10th Working Conference on Reverse Engineering, 2003. WCRE 2003. Proceedings. https://doi.org/10.1109/wcre.2003.1287256