REVIEW 1 cited by
Model-based Automated Testing of Mobile Applications: An Industrial Case Study
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Automatic testing of mobile applications has been a well-researched area in recent years. However, testing in industry is still a very manual practice, as research results have not been fully transferred and adopted. Considering mobile applications, manual testing has the additional burden of adequate testing posed by a large number of available devices and different configurations, as well as the maintenance and setup of such devices. In this paper, we propose and evaluate the use of a model-based test generation approach, where generated tests are executed on a set of cloud-hosted real mobile devices. By using a model-based approach we generate dynamic, less brittle, and implementation simple test cases. The test execution on multiple real devices with different configurations increase the confidence in the implementation of the system under test. Our evaluation shows that the used approach produces a high coverage of the parts of the application related to user interactions. Nevertheless, the inclusion of external services in test generation is required in order to additionally increase the coverage of the complete application. Furthermore, we present the lessons learned while transferring and implementing this approach in an industrial context and applying it to the real product.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Scaling Mobile Chaos Testing with AI-Driven Test Execution
An integrated LLM-based mobile testing system and service-level fault injector ran 180,000+ chaos tests at Uber, finding 23 resilience defects that manual and backend-only testing missed.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.