Leveraging Propagated Infection to Crossfire Mutants
Hang Du, Vijay Krishna Palepu, James A. Jones
Abstract
Mutation testing was proposed to identify weaknesses in test suites by repeatedly generating artificially faulty versions of the software (i.e., mutants) and determining if the test suite is sufficient to detect them (i.e., kill them). When the tests are insufficient, each surviving mutant provides an opportunity to improve the test suite. We conducted a study and found that many such surviving mutants (up to 84% for the subjects of our study) are detectable by simply augmenting existing tests with additional assertions, or assertion amplification. Moreover, we find that many of these mutants are detectable by multiple existing tests, giving developers options for how to detect them. To help with these challenges, we created a technique that performs memory-state analysis to identify candidate assertions that developers can use to detect the surviving mutants. Additionally, we build upon prior research that identifies “crossfiring” opportunities - tests that coincidentally kill multiple mutants. To this end, we developed a theoretical model that describes the varying granularities that crossfiring can occur in the existing test suite, which provide opportunities and options for how to kill surviving mutants. We operationalize this model to an accompanying technique that optimizes the assertion amplification of the existing tests to crossfire multiple mutants with fewer added assertions, optionally concentrated within fewer tests. Our experiments show that we can kill all surviving mutants that are detectable with existing test data with only 1.1% of the identified assertion candidates, and increasing by a factor of 6x, on average, the number of killed mutants from amplified tests, over tests that do not crossfire.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 98bc7a6c-32df-4b30-835c-024af243103eCited by top-tier papers1
Ask how each one uses itBuilds on4
- Evolutionary improvement of assertion oraclesValerio Terragni, Gunel Jahangirova, Paolo Tonella, Mauro PezzèFSE 2020 · 50 citations
- Prioritizing Mutants to Guide Mutation TestingSamuel J. Kaufman, Ryan Featherman, Justin Alvin, Bob Kurtz et al.ICSE 2022 · 36 citations
- Ripples of a Mutation - An Empirical Study of Propagation Effects in Mutation TestingHang Du, Vijay Krishna Palepu, James A. JonesICSE 2024 · 6 citations
- To Kill a Mutant: An Empirical Study of Mutation Testing KillsHang Du, Vijay Krishna Palepu, James A. JonesISSTA 2023 · 5 citations
Related papers
- How Does Killing Surviving Mutants Help Detect Real Bugs with Assertion Generation? A Controlled ExperimentHang Du, Vijay Krishna Palepu, James A. JonesISSTA 2026
- LLMutantKiller: Using Large Language Models to Generate Tests That Kill MutantsFarideh Khalili, Aidan Domondon, Harshit Garg, Frank TipISSTA 2026
- Fuzzing for CPS Mutation TestingJaekwon Lee, Enrico Viganò, Oscar Cornejo, Fabrizio Pastore et al.ASE 2023 · 4 citations
- Does mutation testing improve testing practices?Goran Petrovic, Marko Ivankovic, Gordon Fraser, René JustICSE 2021 · 6 citations
- Transforming Test Suites into CroissantsYang Chen, Alperen Yildiz, Darko Marinov, Reyhaneh JabbarvandISSTA 2023 · 5 citations
