The DOI matches its Crossref record.
TimeAware test suite prioritization
Abstract
Regression test prioritization is often performed in a time constrained execution environment in which testing only occurs for a fixed time period. For example, many organizations rely upon nightly building and regression testing of their applications every time source code changes are committed to a version control repository. This paper presents a regression test prioritization technique that uses a genetic algorithm to reorder test suites in light of testing time constraints. Experiment results indicate that our prioritization approach frequently yields higher average percentage of faults detected (APFD) values, for two case study applications, when basic block level coverage is used instead of method level coverage. The experiments also reveal fundamental trade offs in the performance of time-aware prioritization. This paper shows that our prioritization technique is appropriate for many regression testing environments and explains how the baseline approach can be extended to operate in additional time constrained testing circumstances.
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
Cited by
GenProg: A Generic Method for Automatic Software Repair
Le Goues, C., Nguyen, T., Forrest, S., & Weimer, W. (2012) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.2011.104 · Cited by 1,085
An orchestrated survey of methodologies for automated software test case generation
Anand, S., Burke, E. K., Chen, T. Y., Clark, J., Cohen, M. B., Grieskamp, W., Harman, M., Harrold, M. J., McMinn, P., Bertolino, A., et al. (2013) · Journal of Systems and Software · doi:10.1016/j.jss.2013.02.061 · Cited by 668
The Current State and Future of Search Based Software Engineering
Harman, M. (2007) · Future of Software Engineering (FOSE '07) · doi:10.1109/fose.2007.29 · Cited by 631
A systematic review of search-based testing for non-functional system properties
Afzal, W., Torkar, R., & Feldt, R. (2009) · Information and Software Technology · doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2008.12.005 · Cited by 447
Is the cure worse than the disease? overfitting in automated program repair
Smith, E. K., Barr, E. T., Le Goues, C., & Brun, Y. (2015) · Proceedings of the 2015 10th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering · doi:10.1145/2786805.2786825 · Cited by 323
Metadata
- Authors
- Walcott, K. R., Soffa, M. L., Kapfhammer, G. M., & Roos, R. S.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 2006 international symposium on Software testing and analysis
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2006-07-21
- Pages
- 1-12
- OpenAlex
- W2126752493
- Cited by
- 340
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 10.34
- Type
- conference paper
- 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: TimeAware test suite prioritization. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/1146238.1146240
- The paper
- Walcott, K. R., Soffa, M. L., Kapfhammer, G. M., & Roos, R. S. (2006). TimeAware test suite prioritization. Proceedings of the 2006 international symposium on Software testing and analysis. https://doi.org/10.1145/1146238.1146240
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.