The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Software unit test coverage and adequacy
Abstract
Objective measurement of test quality is one of the key issues in software testing. It has been a major research focus for the last two decades. Many test criteria have been proposed and studied for this purpose. Various kinds of rationales have been presented in support of one criterion or another. We survey the research work in this area. The notion of adequacy criteria is examined together with its role in software dynamic testing. A review of criteria classification is followed by a summary of the methods for comparison and assessment of criteria.
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
Valiant, L. G. (1984) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/1968.1972 · Cited by 3,279
Constraint-based automatic test data generation
DeMilli, R. A., & Offutt, A. J. (1991) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/32.92910 · Cited by 804
On testing non-testable programs
Weyuker, E. J. (1982) · The Computer Journal · doi:10.1093/comjnl/25.4.465 · Cited by 606
Cited by
(2000) · doi:10.1145/351240.351266 · Cited by 753
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
Self-citationA taxonomy of model‐based testing approaches
Utting, M., Pretschner, A., & Legeard, B. (2012) · Software Testing, Verification and Reliability · doi:10.1002/stvr.456 · Cited by 632
Curating GitHub for engineered software projects
Munaiah, N., Kroh, S., Cabrey, C., & Nagappan, M. (2017) · Empirical Software Engineering · doi:10.1007/s10664-017-9512-6 · Cited by 365
Machine learning applied to software testing: A systematic mapping study
Durelli, V. H. S., Durelli, R. S., Borges, S. S., Endo, A. T., Eler, M. M., Dias, D. R. C., & Guimaraes, M. P. (2019) · IEEE Transactions on Reliability · doi:10.1109/tr.2019.2892517 · Cited by 207
Metadata
- Authors
- Zhu, H., Hall, P. A. V., & May, J. H. R.
- Venue
- ACM Computing Surveys
- Published
- 1997-12
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 366-427
- ISSN
- 0360-0300 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-7341
- OpenAlex
- W2154897437
- Cited by
- 1,247
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 33.51
- Type
- journal article
- 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: Software unit test coverage and adequacy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/267580.267590
- The paper
- Zhu, H., Hall, P. A. V., & May, J. H. R. (1997). Software unit test coverage and adequacy. ACM Computing Surveys. https://doi.org/10.1145/267580.267590
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.
