Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 194 references

Regression Testing Optimization for ROS-based Autonomous Systems: A Comprehensive Review of Techniques

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read This paper claims to be the first systematic survey devoted to regression testing optimization for ROS-based autonomous systems, sorting 122 studies into prioritization, minimization, and selection and identifying the gaps that remain.

desk verdict Useful but overclaims its 'first comprehensive ROSAS-tailored' status; the taxonomy and challenge analysis are solid, but the methodology and corpus mapping need major strengthening. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.16101 v1 pith:AJ2T6OFK submitted 2025-06-19 cs.SE

Yupeng Jiang , Shuaiyi Sun , Xi Zheng This is my paper
classification cs.SE
keywords RobotOperatingSystemregressiontestingtestcaseprioritizationsuiteminimizationselectionautonomoussystemssafety-criticalsoftwaresystematicsurvey
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Regression testing re-runs tests after changes to catch regressions; this paper argues that doing it efficiently for ROS-based autonomous systems (ROSAS) is a distinct problem that existing optimization research has not systematically addressed. It claims to be the first survey dedicated to this topic, reviewing 122 studies and sorting them into three families: test case prioritization (ordering tests to reveal faults sooner), test suite minimization (cutting redundant tests), and test case selection (running only tests affected by a change). The survey maps each family onto the specific stresses of ROSAS—multi-modal sensor input, asynchronous distributed nodes, non-deterministic behavior, and real-time safety constraints—and concludes that most existing techniques assume deterministic, single-modal, non-real-time software. A sympathetic reader would take the contribution as a structured map of the field, a diagnosis of why current methods fall short, and a set of proposed research directions.

What carries the argument

Two devices carry the argument. The first is a three-part taxonomy: test case prioritization, test suite minimization, and test case selection, with each category subdivided by technique family, such as coverage-, history-, model-, search-, learning-, and confidence-based prioritization. The second is a ROSAS-specific challenge lens—multi-modal data, asynchronous and non-deterministic behavior, real-time and safety-critical constraints, and missing oracles—through which every surveyed method is judged. The taxonomy makes the gap visible by showing a large body of optimization work that assumes static, deterministic software, and it exposes where ROSAS needs semantics-aware, environment-aware, and adaptive methods. The paper's proposed future machinery, frame-to-vector coverage, which vectorizes sensor frames into semantic representations to measure what was actually exercised, is offered as the natural replacement for code-level coverage.

What would settle it

Re-running the reported search across the eight listed databases with the stated keyword combinations and locating a peer-reviewed survey or technique paper published before mid-2025 that specifically addresses regression testing optimization for ROS-based autonomous systems and is not among the 122 included studies would falsify the first-and-complete claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that regression testing optimization for ROS-based autonomous systems is a genuinely different research territory, and that this review is the first to chart it. The organizing result is a taxonomy of 122 representative studies into test case prioritization, test suite minimization, and test case selection, with hybrid and emerging methods noted; the survey further identifies why each category transfers poorly to ROSAS. The headline diagnosis is that traditional coverage and dependency assumptions break down when tests must account for multi-modal sensor fusion, asynchronous publish-subscribe communication, stochastic learned components, and hard real-time and safety constraints. To close the gap, the paper proposes frame-to-vector semantic coverage metrics, integration of multi-source foundation models, and neurosymbolic reasoning, which combines learned perception with explicit logical rules, for detecting small but safety-critical violations.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the database search, keywords, and snowballing captured every relevant prior study; if even one earlier survey or substantial body of work on regression testing optimization for ROSAS was missed, the claim to be the first survey of this area collapses.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A researcher entering the area gets a shared map: new techniques can be positioned as test case prioritization, minimization, selection, or hybrid, and compared against the same ROSAS challenge dimensions.
  • The gaps the survey identifies become concrete problem statements: semantic coverage metrics, multi-modal test data handling, and oracle construction are the places where progress is most needed.
  • The proposed future directions—frame-to-vector coverage, multi-source foundation models, and neurosymbolic reasoning—provide starting hypotheses for new methods rather than fully validated solutions.
  • For practitioners, the taxonomy doubles as a screening tool: it shows which traditional optimization methods are likely to transfer poorly to ROSAS and why.
  • If the 'first survey' claim holds, later work will likely cite this paper as the baseline against which new ROSAS regression-testing surveys are measured.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Beyond the paper: the frame-to-vector coverage idea could be tested immediately on public ROS2 driving datasets by measuring whether semantic-vector similarity predicts fault detection better than statement coverage does.
  • Beyond the paper: because ROSAS generate rich logs, sensor streams, and build metadata, data-driven selection methods from continuous-integration testing could be adapted to ROSAS with relatively little new machinery.
  • Beyond the paper: if the survey's search is truly complete, the near absence of ROSAS-specific optimization papers before 2021 suggests the field is young enough that early methodological standards, such as common benchmarks and evaluation metrics, are still up for grabs.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper presents a systematic literature review of regression testing optimization techniques for ROS-based autonomous systems (ROSAS). It reports a corpus of 122 studies, categorizes them into test case prioritization, test suite minimization, and test case selection, and introduces a taxonomy of techniques applicable to ROSAS. The survey also identifies challenges (coverage metrics, multi-modal data, non-determinism, and oracle problems) and proposes future directions built around frame-to-vector coverage metrics, multi-source foundation models, and neurosymbolic reasoning. The paper claims to be the first comprehensive survey of regression testing optimization techniques tailored specifically to ROSAS.

Significance. If the central claim were fully supported, the survey would be a useful foundational reference and roadmap for a growing research area. The paper's strengths are its broad corpus, an internally consistent set of categorization tables (the overlap in Table 2 is correctly explained, and Tables 3, 4, and 5 sum to 122), and a clear RQ-driven structure. The taxonomy in Figure 2 is a reasonable organizing device. However, the two load-bearing claims—'first comprehensive survey' and 'techniques tailored for ROSAS'—are not currently verifiable from the manuscript because the search protocol is not reproducible and the corpus is not demonstrably ROSAS-specific. The survey is potentially valuable as a cross-domain roadmap, but the stated contribution needs to be either substantiated with additional evidence or reframed.

major comments (2)
  1. [§2.2–2.3, Table 5] The literature search is not reproducible. Section 2.2 reports 2,100 candidate papers reduced to 122 after applying the criteria in Section 2.3, but the manuscript does not provide the full boolean search strings used for each database, the date range of the search, a screening flow diagram, an inclusion/exclusion log, or a list of the 122 included studies. Table 5 reports only the database provenance of the final set, not which papers were included or excluded at each stage. Because the paper's 'first comprehensive survey' claim depends on the completeness of this search, the missing protocol is a load-bearing issue. The authors should provide a complete reproducibility package, including the query strings, screening decisions, and a numbered list of included studies.
  2. [§2.3, Table 4, §4.4] The claim that the reviewed techniques are 'tailored for ROSAS' is not supported by the evidence presented. Table 4 classifies 88 of 122 studies as 'Traditional Software Testing,' and the inclusion criterion in Section 2.3 explicitly admits studies with 'potential transferability' to ROSAS. Section 4.4 then acknowledges that most emerging techniques 'focus primarily on the testing optimization of deep learning models rather than directly targeting the characteristics of ROSAS.' Without a per-paper mapping between each included study and the specific ROSAS challenges it addresses, the abstract's claim of a survey 'tailored for ROSAS' overstates what the corpus demonstrates. The authors should either add such a mapping (e.g., as an appendix table showing which studies address multi-modal data, asynchronous communication, real-time constraints, or safety requirements) or reframe the contribution as a cross-domain review with transferability analysis.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§4 opening paragraph] The text says 'In Chapter 3, we provide...' when it should say 'In Section 3'; the chapter/section terminology should be made consistent throughout.
  2. [§5.3] The future research directions section relies heavily on the authors' own prior publications (STRaP [13], Zheng et al. [16], Neurostrata [65], GARL [14], Recover [194]) to define the open problems. While self-citation is not inherently improper, the survey should either include independent validation of these directions or explicitly disclose the relationship, so the proposed roadmap is not perceived as circular.
  3. [§2.3] The exclusion criteria mention 'non-peer-reviewed publications' but the final corpus appears to include a replication package entry (reference [125], 'LTM') and possibly other non-archival sources; this inconsistency should be clarified.
  4. [General] The paper does not include a threats-to-validity or limitations subsection discussing the selection bias inherent in the chosen databases and keyword set, which would help readers calibrate the comprehensiveness claim.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the survey's claims are literature-review claims, and its future directions are proposals supported by acknowledged prior work rather than derived predictions.

full rationale

This is a systematic literature review, not a derivation with fitted parameters, equations, or testable predictions. The central claim of being the 'first comprehensive survey' depends on the completeness of the literature search and the interpretation of the inclusion criteria, which are reproducibility and validity concerns rather than circularity. The paper's self-citations (STRaP [13], Zheng et al. [16], Neurostrata [65]) appear mainly as supporting evidence for research insights and future directions, but the survey also relies on numerous external studies, and its conclusions do not reduce to those self-citations. Section 4.4 explicitly concedes that most emerging techniques 'focus primarily on the testing optimization of deep learning models rather than directly targeting the characteristics of ROSAS,' which weakens the framing of the survey as 'tailored for ROSAS' but does not make any step circular. No self-definitional, fitted-input-called-prediction, uniqueness-imported, ansatz-smuggled, or renamed-known-result pattern is present. Therefore, no load-bearing circularity is found.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The survey rests on assumptions about literature coverage, accurate categorization, and transferability of traditional methods. No free parameters or invented entities are present because the paper does not fit data or postulate new physical or conceptual entities.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption The selected databases and keyword set provide comprehensive coverage of relevant literature.
    Section 2.2 lists 8 databases and 8 keyword phrases but no reproducible query strings; any missed survey would invalidate the first-comprehensive claim.
  • domain assumption The categorization of 122 papers into TCP/TSM/TCS and the taxonomy accurately reflects the methods.
    Categorization is performed by authors without inter-rater reliability checks or a published coding protocol.
  • domain assumption Traditional test optimization methods are transferable to ROSAS, despite the paper's own admission that they were not designed for autonomous systems.
    Section 4.4 states most emerging techniques focus on deep learning models rather than ROSAS characteristics; the survey still includes 88 traditional software papers.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Regression Testing Optimization for ROS-based Autonomous Systems: A Comprehensive Review of Techniques." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AJ2T6OFK

@misc{pith2026250616101,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Regression Testing Optimization for ROS-based Autonomous Systems: A Comprehensive Review of Techniques},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AJ2T6OFK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.16101}
}
read the original abstract

Regression testing plays a critical role in maintaining software reliability, particularly for ROS-based autonomous systems (ROSAS), which frequently undergo continuous integration and iterative development. However, conventional regression testing techniques face significant challenges when applied to autonomous systems due to their dynamic and non-deterministic behaviors, complex multi-modal sensor data, asynchronous distributed architectures, and stringent safety and real-time constraints. Although numerous studies have explored test optimization in traditional software contexts, regression testing optimization specifically for ROSAS remains largely unexplored. To address this gap, we present the first comprehensive survey systematically reviewing regression testing optimization techniques tailored for ROSAS. We analyze and categorize 122 representative studies into regression test case prioritization, minimization, and selection methods. A structured taxonomy is introduced to clearly illustrate their applicability and limitations within ROSAS contexts. Furthermore, we highlight major challenges specific to regression testing for ROSAS, including effectively prioritizing tests in response to frequent system modifications, efficiently minimizing redundant tests, and difficulty in accurately selecting impacted test cases. Finally, we propose research insights and identify promising future directions, such as leveraging frame-to-vector coverage metrics, multi-source foundation models, and neurosymbolic reasoning to enhance regression testing efficiency and effectiveness. This survey provides a foundational reference and practical roadmap for advancing the state-of-the-art in regression testing optimization for ROSAS.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

194 extracted references · 58 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    https: //waymo.com/ (2025)

    Waymo: Waymo - Self-Driving Cars - Autonomous Vehicles - Ride-Hail. https: //waymo.com/ (2025)

    2025

  2. [2]

    https://www.tesla.com/autopilot (2025)

    Tesla: Autopilot. https://www.tesla.com/autopilot (2025)

    2025

  3. [3]

    https://www.uber.com/us/en/autonomous/ (2025)

    Uber: Uber A V. https://www.uber.com/us/en/autonomous/ (2025)

    2025

  4. [4]

    https://wing.com/ (2025)

    Wing: Wing Drone Delivery. https://wing.com/ (2025)

    2025

  5. [5]

    https://www.flyzipline.com/ (2025)

    Zipline: Zipline Drone Delivery & Logistics. https://www.flyzipline.com/ (2025)

    2025

  6. [6]

    https://percepto.co/ (2025)

    Percepto: Percepto Autonomous Drone. https://percepto.co/ (2025)

    2025

  7. [7]

    https://www.unitree.com/ (2025)

    YuShu: Unitree Robotics. https://www.unitree.com/ (2025)

    2025

  8. [8]

    https://www.ubtrobot.com/en/ (2025)

    UBTECH: UBTECH. https://www.ubtrobot.com/en/ (2025)

    2025

Show all 194 references
  1. [9]

    https://bostondynamics.com/ (2025)

    Dynamics, B.: Boston Dynamics. https://bostondynamics.com/ (2025)

    2025

  2. [10]

    https://www.intuitive.com/ en-us/products-and-services/da-vinci (2025)

    Intuitive: Da Vinci Robotic Surgical Systems. https://www.intuitive.com/ en-us/products-and-services/da-vinci (2025)

    2025

  3. [11]

    In: ICRA Workshop on Open Source Software, vol

    Quigley, M., Conley, K., Gerkey, B., Faust, J., Foote, T., Leibs, J., Wheeler, R., Ng, A.Y.,et al.: Ros: an open-source robot operating system. In: ICRA Workshop on Open Source Software, vol. 3, p. 5 (2009). Kobe

    2009

  4. [12]

    IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering49(4), 1964–1982 (2022)

    Deng, Y., Zheng, X., Zhang, T., Liu, H., Lou, G., Kim, M., Chen, T.Y.: A declarative metamorphic testing framework for autonomous driving. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering49(4), 1964–1982 (2022)

    2022

  5. [13]

    In: Proceedings of the 30th ACM Joint European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering, pp

    Deng, Y., Zheng, X., Zhang, M., Lou, G., Zhang, T.: Scenario-based test reduction and prioritization for multi-module autonomous driving systems. In: Proceedings of the 30th ACM Joint European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Enginee...

    2022

  6. [14]

    In: 2025 IEEE/ACM 47th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), pp

    Liang, L., Deng, Y., Morton, K., Kallinen, V., James, A., Seth, A., Kuantama, E., Mukhopadhyay, S., Han, R., Zheng, X.: Garl: Genetic algorithm-augmented reinforcement learning to detect violations in marker-based autonomous land- ing systems. In: 2025 IEEE/ACM 47th Internatio...

    2025

  7. [15]

    https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.12176

    Schroder, S., Deng, Y., James, A., Seth, A., Morton, K., Mukhopadhyay, S., Han, R., Zheng, X.: Towards Robust Autonomous Landing Systems: Iterative Solutions and Key Lessons Learned (2025). https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.12176

    2025 arXiv

  8. [16]

    In: Companion Proceedings of the 32nd ACM International Conference on the Foundations of Software Engineering, pp

    Zheng, X., Mok, A.K., Piskac, R., Lee, Y.J., Krishnamachari, B., Zhu, D., 55 Sokolsky, O., Lee, I.: Testing learning-enabled cyber-physical systems with large- language models: A formal approach. In: Companion Proceedings of the 32nd ACM International Conference on the Foundat...

    2024

  9. [17]

    Proceedings of the IEEE100(1), 13–28 (2011)

    Derler, P., Lee, E.A., Vincentelli, A.S.: Modeling cyber–physical systems. Proceedings of the IEEE100(1), 13–28 (2011)

    2011

  10. [18]

    In: 2020 IEEE 13th International Conference on Software Testing, Validation and Verification (ICST), pp

    Afzal, A., Le Goues, C., Hilton, M., Timperley, C.S.: A study on challenges of testing robotic systems. In: 2020 IEEE 13th International Conference on Software Testing, Validation and Verification (ICST), pp. 96–107 (2020). IEEE

    2020

  11. [19]

    Software testing, verification and reliability22(2), 67–120 (2012)

    Yoo, S., Harman, M.: Regression testing minimization, selection and priori- tization: a survey. Software testing, verification and reliability22(2), 67–120 (2012)

    2012

  12. [20]

    IET Software 17(2), 93–136 (2023)

    Habib, A.S., Khan, S.U.R., Felix, E.A.: A systematic review on search-based test suite reduction: State-of-the-art, taxonomy, and future directions. IET Software 17(2), 93–136 (2023)

    2023

  13. [21]

    In: 2023 IEEE/ACIS 21st International Conference on Software Engineering Research, Management and Applications (SERA), pp

    Xiao, Z., Xiao, L.: A systematic literature review on test case prioritization and regression test selection. In: 2023 IEEE/ACIS 21st International Conference on Software Engineering Research, Management and Applications (SERA), pp. 235–242 (2023). IEEE

    2023

  14. [22]

    Empirical Software Engineering27(2), 29 (2022)

    Pan, R., Bagherzadeh, M., Ghaleb, T.A., Briand, L.: Test case selection and prioritization using machine learning: a systematic literature review. Empirical Software Engineering27(2), 29 (2022)

    2022

  15. [23]

    IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering (2024)

    Haas, R., N¨ ommer, R., Juergens, E., Apel, S.: Optimization of automated and manual software tests in industrial practice: A survey and historical analysis. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering (2024)

    2024

  16. [24]

    Software Testing, Verification and Reliability32(1), 1794 (2022)

    Sadri-Moshkenani, Z., Bradley, J., Rothermel, G.: Survey on test case genera- tion, selection and prioritization for cyber-physical systems. Software Testing, Verification and Reliability32(1), 1794 (2022)

    2022

  17. [25]

    Technical report, Technical report, EBSE Technical Report EBSE-2007-01 (2007)

    Kitchenham, B., Charters, S.: Guidelines for performing systematic litera- ture reviews in software engineering. Technical report, Technical report, EBSE Technical Report EBSE-2007-01 (2007)

    2007

  18. [26]

    In: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering, pp

    Wohlin, C.: Guidelines for snowballing in systematic literature studies and a replication in software engineering. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering, pp. 1–10 (2014)

    2014

  19. [27]

    In: PROCEEDINGS The Eighth International Symposium On Software Reliability Engineering, pp

    Wong, W.E., Horgan, J.R., London, S., Agrawal, H.: A study of effective 56 regression testing in practice. In: PROCEEDINGS The Eighth International Symposium On Software Reliability Engineering, pp. 264–274 (1997). IEEE

    1997

  20. [28]

    In: Proceedings of the 33rd ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis, pp

    Huynh, H., Pham, N., Nguyen, T.N., Nguyen, V.: Segment-based test case prioritization: A multi-objective approach. In: Proceedings of the 33rd ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis, pp. 1149–1160 (2024)

    2024

  21. [29]

    Journal of Systems and Software169, 110712 (2020) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2020.110712

    Huang, R., Zhang, Q., Towey, D., Sun, W., Chen, J.: Regression test case prior- itization by code combinations coverage. Journal of Systems and Software169, 110712 (2020) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2020.110712

    2020

  22. [30]

    International Journal of Computer Applications180, 1–8 (2018)

    Rahman, M.A., Hasan, M.A., Siddik, M.S.: Prioritizing dissimilar test cases in regression testing using historical failure data. International Journal of Computer Applications180, 1–8 (2018)

    2018

  23. [31]

    Journal of Systems and Software153, 86–104 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2019.03.064

    Pradhan, D., Wang, S., Ali, S., Yue, T., Liaaen, M.: Employing rule mining and multi-objective search for dynamic test case prioritization. Journal of Systems and Software153, 86–104 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2019.03.064

    2019 doi

  24. [32]

    International Journal of Information Technology (2024)

    Garg, K., Shekhar, S.: Test case prioritization based on fault sensitivity analysis using ranked nsga-2. International Journal of Information Technology (2024)

    2024

  25. [33]

    Journal of Systems and Software159, 110430 (2020) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2019

    Magalh˜ aes, C., Andrade, J., Perrusi, L., Mota, A., Barros, F., Maia, E.: Hsp: A hybrid selection and prioritisation of regression test cases based on informa- tion retrieval and code coverage applied on an industrial case study. Journal of Systems and Software159, 110430 (20...

    2020 doi

  26. [34]

    ACM transactions on software engineering and methodology (TOSEM)2(3), 270–285 (1993)

    Harrold, M.J., Gupta, R., Soffa, M.L.: A methodology for controlling the size of a test suite. ACM transactions on software engineering and methodology (TOSEM)2(3), 270–285 (1993)

    1993

  27. [35]

    Computers, Materials & Continua (2023)

    Sheikh, R., Babar, M.I., Butt, R., Abdelmaboud, A., Eisa, T.A.E.: An optimized test case minimization technique using genetic algorithm for regression testing. Computers, Materials & Continua (2023)

    2023

  28. [36]

    In: Proceedings of the 41st International Conference on Software Engineering

    Cruciani, E., Miranda, B., Verdecchia, R., Bertolino, A.: Scalable approaches for test suite reduction. In: Proceedings of the 41st International Conference on Software Engineering. ICSE ’19, pp. 419–429. IEEE Press, ??? (2019). https: //doi.org/10.1109/ICSE.2019.00055 .https:...

    2019

  29. [37]

    Intelligent Automation & Soft Computing (2021)

    Zayed, H.A.B., Maashi, M.S.: Optimizing the software testing problem using search-based software engineering techniques. Intelligent Automation & Soft Computing (2021)

    2021

  30. [38]

    Bharathi, M.: Optimum test suite using fault-type coverage-based ant colony 57 optimization algorithm. Int. J. Appl. Metaheuristic Comput.13, 1–23 (2022)

    2022

  31. [39]

    In: Proceedings of the 42nd ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, pp

    Donaldson, A.F., Thomson, P., Teliman, V., Milizia, S., Maselco, A.P., Karpi´ nski, A.: Test-case reduction and deduplication almost for free with transformation-based compiler testing. In: Proceedings of the 42nd ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Programming Language De...

    2021

  32. [40]

    IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering (2024)

    Chaleshtari, N.B., Marquer, Y., Pastore, F., Briand, L.C.: Aim: Automated input set minimization for metamorphic security testing. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering (2024)

    2024

  33. [41]

    IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering49(3), 1027–1043 (2022)

    Viggiato, M., Paas, D., Buzon, C., Bezemer, C.-P.: Identifying similar test cases that are specified in natural language. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering49(3), 1027–1043 (2022)

    2022

  34. [42]

    In: 2020 IEEE 13th International Conference on Software Testing, Validation and Verification (ICST), pp

    Alsharif, A., Kapfhammer, G.M., McMinn, P.: Sticcer: Fast and effective database test suite reduction through merging of similar test cases. In: 2020 IEEE 13th International Conference on Software Testing, Validation and Verification (ICST), pp. 220–230 (2020). IEEE

    2020

  35. [43]

    CSI Transactions on ICT1, 253–260 (2013)

    Kumar, G., Bhatia, P.K.: Software testing optimization through test suite reduction using fuzzy clustering. CSI Transactions on ICT1, 253–260 (2013)

    2013

  36. [44]

    Pang, Y., Xue, X., Namin, A.S.: A clustering-based test case classification technique for enhancing regression testing. J. Softw.12, 153–164 (2017)

    2017

  37. [45]

    In: 2018 IEEE 25th International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (SANER), pp

    Coviello, C., Romano, S., Scanniello, G., Marchetto, A., Antoniol, G., Corazza, A.: Clustering support for inadequate test suite reduction. In: 2018 IEEE 25th International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (SANER), pp. 95–105 (2018). https://doi.org...

    2018

  38. [46]

    IEEE Transactions on software engineering22(8), 529–551 (1996)

    Rothermel, G., Harrold, M.J.: Analyzing regression test selection techniques. IEEE Transactions on software engineering22(8), 529–551 (1996)

    1996

  39. [47]

    In: Proceedings of the 39th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, pp

    Zhang, G., Liu, L., Chen, Z., Wang, J.: Hybrid regression test selection by inte- grating file and method dependences. In: Proceedings of the 39th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, pp. 1557–1569 (2024)

    2024

  40. [48]

    ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology33(6), 1–29 (2024)

    Aghababaeyan, Z., Abdellatif, M., Dadkhah, M., Briand, L.: Deepgd: A multi- objective black-box test selection approach for deep neural networks. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology33(6), 1–29 (2024)

    2024

  41. [49]

    In: Proceedings of the 29th ACM Joint Meeting on European Software Engineering Conference and 58 Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering, pp

    Mehta, S., Farmahinifarahani, F., Bhagwan, R., Guptha, S., Jafari, S., Kumar, R., Saini, V., Santhiar, A.: Data-driven test selection at scale. In: Proceedings of the 29th ACM Joint Meeting on European Software Engineering Conference and 58 Symposium on the Foundations of Soft...

    2021

  42. [50]

    In: 2019 IEEE 19th International Conference on Software Quality, Reliability and Security (QRS), pp

    Li, Y., Wang, J., Yang, Y., Wang, Q.: Method-level test selection for con- tinuous integration with static dependencies and dynamic execution rules. In: 2019 IEEE 19th International Conference on Software Quality, Reliability and Security (QRS), pp. 350–361 (2019). https://doi...

    2019

  43. [51]

    Fosse, T.B., Mottu, J.-M., Tisi, M., Suny´ e, G.: Source-code level regression test selection: the model-driven way. J. Object Technol.18, 13–120 (2019)

    2019

  44. [52]

    2023 IEEE Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation (ICST), 422–432 (2023)

    Hundsdorfer, S., Elsner, D., Pretschner, A.: Dirts: Dependency injection aware regression test selection. 2023 IEEE Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation (ICST), 422–432 (2023)

    2023

  45. [53]

    Journal of Physics: Conference Series1175(1), 012098 (2019) https: //doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1175/1/012098

    Marulitua Sinaga, A., Satia Dharma, A., Hutajulu, O., Ginting, A., Siman- juntak, G.: Dynamic partitioning and additional branch coverage for test case selection. Journal of Physics: Conference Series1175(1), 012098 (2019) https: //doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1175/1/012098

    2019 doi

  46. [54]

    In: 2023 IEEE/ACM 45th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), pp

    Wang, S., Lian, X., Marinov, D., Xu, T.: Test selection for unified regression test- ing. In: 2023 IEEE/ACM 45th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), pp. 1687–1699 (2023). IEEE

    2023

  47. [55]

    In: Formal Techniques for (Networked And) Distributed Systems (2023).https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:258426404

    Spaendonck, P.H.M.: Efficient dynamic model based testing using greedy test case selection. In: Formal Techniques for (Networked And) Distributed Systems (2023).https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:258426404

    2023

  48. [56]

    Electronics13(9) (2024) https://doi.org/10.3390/ electronics13091762

    Yang, S., Guo, J., Rui, X.: Formal analysis and detection for ros2 communi- cation security vulnerability. Electronics13(9) (2024) https://doi.org/10.3390/ electronics13091762

    2024

  49. [57]

    IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intel- ligence41(2), 423–443 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAMI.2018.2798607

    Baltruˇ saitis, T., Ahuja, C., Morency, L.-P.: Multimodal machine learning: A sur- vey and taxonomy. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intel- ligence41(2), 423–443 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAMI.2018.2798607

    2019

  50. [58]

    Sensors23(15) (2023) https://doi.org/10.3390/s23156783

    Gu, J., Lind, A., Chhetri, T.R., Bellone, M., Sell, R.: End-to-end multimodal sensor dataset collection framework for autonomous vehicles. Sensors23(15) (2023) https://doi.org/10.3390/s23156783

    2023 doi

  51. [59]

    Pascher, M., Goldau, F.F., Kronhardt, K., Frese, U., Gerken, J.: Adaptix - a transitional xr framework for development and evaluation of shared control applications in assistive robotics. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact.8(EICS) (2024) https://doi.org/10.1145/3660243

    2024 doi

  52. [60]

    In: 2024 IEEE Interna- tional Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pp

    Cao, H., Xu, Y., Yang, J., Yin, P., Yuan, S., Xie, L.: Mopa: Multi-modal prior aided domain adaptation for 3d semantic segmentation. In: 2024 IEEE Interna- tional Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pp. 9463–9470 (2024). 59 https://doi.org/10.1109/ICRA57147.2024.10610316

    2024

  53. [61]

    In: Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM 16th International Conference on Util- ity and Cloud Computing

    Toffetti, G., Militano, L., Tharaka, R., Straub, M.: Ros-based robotic appli- cations orchestration in the compute continuum: Challenges and approaches. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM 16th International Conference on Util- ity and Cloud Computing. UCC ’23. Association for Com...

    2024

  54. [62]

    Journal of Software: Evolution and Process30(2018)

    Lauer, M., Amy, M., Fabre, J.-C., Roy, M., Excoffon, W., Stoicescu, M.: Resilient computing on ros using adaptive fault tolerance. Journal of Software: Evolution and Process30(2018)

    2018

  55. [63]

    Journal of Hydrodynamics (2024)

    Zhang, B., Zhang, C., Hu, X.: Automated regression test method for scien- tific computing libraries: Illustration with sphinxsys. Journal of Hydrodynamics (2024)

    2024

  56. [64]

    IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering50, 2544–2567 (2024)

    Caldas, R.D., Garc’ia, J.A.P., Schiopu, M., Pelliccione, P., Rodrigues, G., Berger, T.: Runtime verification and field-based testing for ros-based robotic systems. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering50, 2544–2567 (2024)

    2024

  57. [65]

    ArXivabs/2502.12267(2025)

    Zheng, X., Li, Z., Ruchkin, I., Piskac, R., Pajic, M.: Neurostrata: Harnessing neurosymbolic paradigms for improved design, testability, and verifiability of autonomous cps. ArXivabs/2502.12267(2025)

    2025 arXiv

  58. [66]

    Science of Computer Programming215, 102761 (2022)

    Yan, R., Chen, Y., Gao, H., Yan, J.: Test case prioritization with neuron valuation based pattern. Science of Computer Programming215, 102761 (2022)

    2022

  59. [67]

    Soft Computing26(17), 8203–8220 (2022)

    Demir, Z.C., Emrah Amrahov, S ¸.: Dominating set-based test prioritization algorithms for regression testing. Soft Computing26(17), 8203–8220 (2022)

    2022

  60. [68]

    ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM)31(1), 1–50 (2021)

    Zhou, J., Chen, J., Hao, D.: Parallel test prioritization. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM)31(1), 1–50 (2021)

    2021

  61. [69]

    Empirical Software Engineering26(6), 133 (2021)

    Laaber, C., Gall, H.C., Leitner, P.: Applying test case prioritization to software microbenchmarks. Empirical Software Engineering26(6), 133 (2021)

    2021

  62. [70]

    In: International Symposium on Search Based Software Engineering, pp

    Lu, C., Zhang, H., Yue, T., Ali, S.: Search-based selection and prioritization of test scenarios for autonomous driving systems. In: International Symposium on Search Based Software Engineering, pp. 41–55 (2021). Springer

    2021

  63. [71]

    2018 33rd IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE), 120–131 (2018)

    Ma, L., Juefei-Xu, F., Zhang, F., Sun, J., Xue, M., Li, B., Chen, C., Su, T., Li, L., Liu, Y., Zhao, J., Wang, Y.: Deepgauge: Multi-granularity testing criteria for deep learning systems. 2018 33rd IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE), 120–...

    2018

  64. [72]

    Proceedings of the 26th Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (2017)

    Pei, K., Cao, Y., Yang, J., Jana, S.S.: Deepxplore: Automated whitebox testing 60 of deep learning systems. Proceedings of the 26th Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (2017)

    2017

  65. [73]

    In: 2024 IEEE 35th International Sym- posium on Software Reliability Engineering (ISSRE), pp

    Wang, H., Yi, P.L., Parladorio, J., Lam, W., Marinov, D., Xie, T.: Hierarchy- aware regression test prioritization. In: 2024 IEEE 35th International Sym- posium on Software Reliability Engineering (ISSRE), pp. 343–354 (2024). IEEE

    2024

  66. [74]

    Empirical Software Engineering 27(6), 133 (2022)

    Prado Lima, J.A., Mendon¸ ca, W.D., Vergilio, S.R., Assun¸ c˜ ao, W.K.: Cost- effective learning-based strategies for test case prioritization in continuous integration of highly-configurable software. Empirical Software Engineering 27(6), 133 (2022)

    2022

  67. [75]

    In: 2023 IEEE Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation (ICST), pp

    Wuersching, R., Elsner, D., Leinen, F., Pretschner, A., Grueneissl, G., Neumeyr, T., Vosseler, T.: Severity-aware prioritization of system-level regression tests in automotive software. In: 2023 IEEE Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation (ICST), pp. 398–4...

    2023

  68. [76]

    ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology32(3), 1–32 (2023)

    Chen, Z., Chen, J., Wang, W., Zhou, J., Wang, M., Chen, X., Zhou, S., Wang, J.: Exploring better black-box test case prioritization via log analysis. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology32(3), 1–32 (2023)

    2023

  69. [77]

    In: Proceedings of the 33rd ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis, pp

    Cheng, R., Wang, S., Jabbarvand, R., Marinov, D.: Revisiting test-case prioriti- zation on long-running test suites. In: Proceedings of the 33rd ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis, pp. 615–627 (2024)

    2024

  70. [78]

    IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering48(2), 453–465 (2020)

    Lima, J.A.P., Vergilio, S.R.: A multi-armed bandit approach for test case priori- tization in continuous integration environments. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering48(2), 453–465 (2020)

    2020

  71. [79]

    In: 2021 IEEE/ACM 43rd International Conference on Software Engineering: Companion Proceedings (ICSE-Companion), pp

    Jin, X., Servant, F.: Cibench: a dataset and collection of techniques for build and test selection and prioritization in continuous integration. In: 2021 IEEE/ACM 43rd International Conference on Software Engineering: Companion Proceedings (ICSE-Companion), pp. 166–167 (2021). IEEE

    2021

  72. [80]

    Automated Software Engineering30(2), 28 (2023)

    Chen, J., Ge, J., Zheng, H.: Actgraph: prioritization of test cases based on deep neural network activation graph. Automated Software Engineering30(2), 28 (2023)

    2023

  73. [81]

    IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering48(12), 5102–5119 (2021)

    Li, F., Zhou, J., Li, Y., Hao, D., Zhang, L.: Aga: An accelerated greedy addi- tional algorithm for test case prioritization. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering48(12), 5102–5119 (2021)

    2021

  74. [82]

    In: Proceedings of the 39th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, pp

    Chen, J., Wang, J., Zhang, X., Sun, Y., Kwiatkowska, M., Chen, J., Cheng, P.: Fast: Boosting uncertainty-based test prioritization methods for neural net- works via feature selection. In: Proceedings of the 39th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineeri...

    2024

  75. [83]

    Software Testing, Verification and Reliability34(1), 1864 (2024)

    Li, Y., Wang, Z., Wang, J., Chen, J., Mou, R., Li, G.: Semantic-aware two-phase test case prioritization for continuous integration. Software Testing, Verification and Reliability34(1), 1864 (2024)

    2024

  76. [84]

    IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering49(4), 1615–1639 (2022)

    Yaraghi, A.S., Bagherzadeh, M., Kahani, N., Briand, L.C.: Scalable and accurate test case prioritization in continuous integration contexts. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering49(4), 1615–1639 (2022)

    2022

  77. [85]

    In: 2020 IEEE 20th International Conference on Software Quality, Reliability and Security (QRS), pp

    Han, J., Li, Z., Guo, J., Zhao, R.: Convergence based evaluation strategies for learning agent of hyper-heuristic framework for test case prioritization. In: 2020 IEEE 20th International Conference on Software Quality, Reliability and Security (QRS), pp. 394–405 (2020). IEEE

    2020

  78. [86]

    Software Quality Journal29, 381–403 (2021)

    Magalh˜ aes, C., Mota, A., Momente, L.: Ui test case prioritization on an indus- trial setting: A search for the best criteria. Software Quality Journal29, 381–403 (2021)

    2021

  79. [87]

    Soft Computing26(15), 6953–6968 (2022)

    Nayak, S., Kumar, C., Tripathi, S.: Analytic hierarchy process-based regres- sion test case prioritization technique enhancing the fault detection rate. Soft Computing26(15), 6953–6968 (2022)

    2022

  80. [88]

    In: 2022 IEEE 33rd International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering (ISSRE), pp

    Ayerdi, J., Arrieta, A., Pobee, E.B., Arratibel, M.: Multi-objective metamorphic test case selection: an industrial case study (practical experience report). In: 2022 IEEE 33rd International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering (ISSRE), pp. 541–552 (2022). IEEE

    2022

  81. [89]

    Automated Software Engineering31(2), 51 (2024)

    Sakhrawi, Z., Labidi, T.: Test case selection and prioritization approach for auto- mated regression testing using ontology and cosmic measurement. Automated Software Engineering31(2), 51 (2024)

    2024

  82. [90]

    ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology32(2), 1–30 (2023)

    Birchler, C., Khatiri, S., Derakhshanfar, P., Panichella, S., Panichella, A.: Single and multi-objective test cases prioritization for self-driving cars in virtual envi- ronments. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology32(2), 1–30 (2023)

    2023

  83. [91]

    Neural Computing and Applications34(24), 22435–22447 (2022)

    Raamesh, L., Radhika, S., Jothi, S.: A cost-effective test case selection and prioritization using hybrid battle royale-based remora optimization. Neural Computing and Applications34(24), 22435–22447 (2022)

    2022

  84. [92]

    Soft Computing26(22), 12393–12419 (2022)

    Bajaj, A., Sangwan, O.P., Abraham, A.: Improved novel bat algorithm for test case prioritization and minimization. Soft Computing26(22), 12393–12419 (2022)

    2022

  85. [93]

    Journal of Systems and Software172, 110850 (2021) 62

    Mondal, S., Nasre, R.: Hansie: Hybrid and consensus regression test prioritiza- tion. Journal of Systems and Software172, 110850 (2021) 62

    2021

  86. [94]

    In: Proceed- ings of the 39th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, pp

    Baz, A., Huang, M., Shi, A.: Prioritizing tests for improved runtime. In: Proceed- ings of the 39th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, pp. 2273–2278 (2024)

    2024

  87. [95]

    IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering48(10), 4060–4073 (2021)

    Mondal, S., Nasre, R.: Colosseum: Regression test prioritization by delta dis- placement in test coverage. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering48(10), 4060–4073 (2021)

    2021

  88. [96]

    In: 2022 IEEE 22nd Inter- national Conference on Software Quality, Reliability and Security (QRS), pp

    Chen, F., Li, Z., Shang, Y., Yang, Y.: Focus on new test cases in continuous integration testing based on reinforcement learning. In: 2022 IEEE 22nd Inter- national Conference on Software Quality, Reliability and Security (QRS), pp. 830–841 (2022). IEEE

    2022

  89. [97]

    Information and Software Technology165, 107339 (2024)

    Wang, X., Zhang, S.: Cluster-based adaptive test case prioritization. Information and Software Technology165, 107339 (2024)

    2024

  90. [98]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems34, 20874–20886 (2021)

    Li, Y., Li, M., Lai, Q., Liu, Y., Xu, Q.: Testrank: Bringing order into unlabeled test instances for deep learning tasks. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems34, 20874–20886 (2021)

    2021

  91. [99]

    240–251 (2023)

    Yang, L., Chen, J., You, H., Han, J., Jiang, J., Sun, Z., Lin, X., Liang, F., Kang, Y.: Can code representation boost ir-based test case prioritization? In: 2023 IEEE 34th International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering (ISSRE), pp. 240–251 (2023). IEEE

    2023

  92. [100]

    Journal of Systems and Software192, 111419 (2022)

    Zhang, Q., Fang, C., Sun, W., Yu, S., Xu, Y., Liu, Y.: Test case prioritization using partial attention. Journal of Systems and Software192, 111419 (2022)

    2022

  93. [101]

    In: 2022 IEEE International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (SANER), pp

    Da Roza, E.A., Lima, J.A.P., Silva, R.C., Vergilio, S.R.: Machine learning regres- sion techniques for test case prioritization in continuous integration environment. In: 2022 IEEE International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (SANER), pp. 196–206 ...

    2022

  94. [102]

    Automated Software Engineering29(2), 50 (2022)

    Mahdieh, M., Mirian-Hosseinabadi, S.-H., Mahdieh, M.: Test case prioritiza- tion using test case diversification and fault-proneness estimations. Automated Software Engineering29(2), 50 (2022)

    2022

  95. [103]

    In: Proceedings of the 39th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, pp

    Shen, J., Li, Z., Pan, M., Li, X.: Prioritizing test inputs for dnns using training dynamics. In: Proceedings of the 39th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, pp. 1219–1231 (2024)

    2024

  96. [104]

    In: 2021 IEEE International Con- ference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME), pp

    Sharif, A., Marijan, D., Liaaen, M.: Deeporder: Deep learning for test case prioritization in continuous integration testing. In: 2021 IEEE International Con- ference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME), pp. 525–534 (2021). IEEE

    2021

  97. [105]

    IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering48(8), 2836–2856 (2021)

    Bagherzadeh, M., Kahani, N., Briand, L.: Reinforcement learning for test case 63 prioritization. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering48(8), 2836–2856 (2021)

    2021

  98. [106]

    In: 2023 International Conference on Advances in Computing, Communication and Applied Informatics (ACCAI), pp

    Nithya, B., Prasanthi, B.: Fuzzy and ann based model for test case prioritiza- tion for regression testing. In: 2023 International Conference on Advances in Computing, Communication and Applied Informatics (ACCAI), pp. 1–9 (2023). IEEE

    2023

  99. [107]

    Soft Computing25(7), 5163–5172 (2021)

    Gokilavani, N., Bharathi, B.: Test case prioritization to examine software for fault detection using pca extraction and k-means clustering with ranking. Soft Computing25(7), 5163–5172 (2021)

    2021

  100. [108]

    In: 2024 IEEE International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering-Companion (SANER-C), pp

    G˘ aceanu, R., Szederjesi-Dragomir, A., Vescan, A.: Leveraging rough sets for enhanced test case prioritization in a continuous integration context. In: 2024 IEEE International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering-Companion (SANER-C), pp. 175–182 (2024). IEEE

    2024

  101. [109]

    Proceedings of the 29th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis (2019)

    Feng, Y., Shi, Q., Gao, X., Wan, J., Fang, C., Chen, Z.: Deepgini: prioritizing massive tests to enhance the robustness of deep neural networks. Proceedings of the 29th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis (2019)

    2019

  102. [110]

    Proceedings of the 31st ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis (2022)

    Weiss, M., Tonella, P.: Simple techniques work surprisingly well for neural net- work test prioritization and active learning (replicability study). Proceedings of the 31st ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis (2022)

    2022

  103. [111]

    In: 2021 IEEE/ACM 43rd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), pp

    Wang, Z., You, H., Chen, J., Zhang, Y., Dong, X., Zhang, W.: Prioritizing test inputs for deep neural networks via mutation analysis. In: 2021 IEEE/ACM 43rd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), pp. 397–409 (2021). IEEE

    2021

  104. [112]

    IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering50(6), 1396–1424 (2024)

    Li, Y., Dang, X., Pian, W., Habib, A., Klein, J., Bissyand´ e, T.F.: Test input prioritization for graph neural networks. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering50(6), 1396–1424 (2024)

    2024

  105. [113]

    ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology33(1), 1–40 (2023)

    Dang, X., Li, Y., Papadakis, M., Klein, J., Bissyand´ e, T.F., Le Traon, Y.: Graph- prior: mutation-based test input prioritization for graph neural networks. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology33(1), 1–40 (2023)

    2023

  106. [114]

    Empirical Software Engineering29(5), 111 (2024)

    Li, Y., Dang, X., Ma, L., Klein, J., Bissyand´ e, T.F.: Prioritizing test cases for deep learning-based video classifiers. Empirical Software Engineering29(5), 111 (2024)

    2024

  107. [115]

    IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering50(3), 413–442 (2024) 64

    Dang, X., Li, Y., Papadakis, M., Klein, J., Bissyand´ e, T.F., Le Traon, Y.: Test input prioritization for machine learning classifiers. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering50(3), 413–442 (2024) 64

    2024

  108. [116]

    ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology33(5), 1–44 (2024)

    Li, Y., Dang, X., Ma, L., Klein, J., Le Traon, Y., Bissyand´ e, T.F.: Test input prioritization for 3d point clouds. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology33(5), 1–44 (2024)

    2024

  109. [117]

    ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology34(1), 1–24 (2024)

    Wang, X., Muqeet, A., Yue, T., Ali, S., Arcaini, P.: Test case minimiza- tion with quantum annealers. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology34(1), 1–24 (2024)

    2024

  110. [118]

    In: 2023 IEEE/ACM 45th Inter- national Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), pp

    Pan, R., Ghaleb, T.A., Briand, L.: Atm: Black-box test case minimization based on test code similarity and evolutionary search. In: 2023 IEEE/ACM 45th Inter- national Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), pp. 1700–1711 (2023). IEEE

    2023

  111. [119]

    International Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering32(02), 193–225 (2022)

    Coviello, C., Romano, S., Scanniello, G., Antoniol, G.: Gasser: a multi-objective evolutionary approach for test suite reduction. International Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering32(02), 193–225 (2022)

    2022

  112. [120]

    ¨O., S¨ ozer, H.: An effective formulation of the multi-criteria test suite minimization problem

    ¨Ozener, O. ¨O., S¨ ozer, H.: An effective formulation of the multi-criteria test suite minimization problem. Journal of Systems and Software168, 110632 (2020)

    2020

  113. [121]

    ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM)29(3), 1–50 (2020)

    Xue, Y., Li, Y.-F.: Multi-objective integer programming approaches for solving the multi-criteria test-suite minimization problem: Towards sound and com- plete solutions of a particular search-based software-engineering problem. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Met...

    2020

  114. [122]

    In: 2024 IEEE Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation (ICST), pp

    Nicourt, E., Kushigian, B., Nandi, C., Falcone, Y.: Using mutation testing to improve and minimize test suites for smart contracts. In: 2024 IEEE Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation (ICST), pp. 341–352 (2024). IEEE

    2024

  115. [123]

    The Journal of Supercomputing78(16), 18379–18403 (2022)

    Raamesh, L., Jothi, S., Radhika, S.: Test case minimization and prioritization for regression testing using sbla-based adaboost convolutional neural network. The Journal of Supercomputing78(16), 18379–18403 (2022)

    2022

  116. [124]

    In: Proceedings of the 32nd ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis, pp

    Callaghan, D., Fischer, B.: Improving spectrum-based localization of multi- ple faults by iterative test suite reduction. In: Proceedings of the 32nd ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis, pp. 1445–1457 (2023)

    2023

  117. [125]

    Pan, R., Ghaleb, T.A., Briand, L.C.: LTM: Scalable and black-box similarity- based test suite minimization based on language models (replication package) (2023)

    2023

  118. [126]

    ArXivabs/2404.03629(2024) 65

    Timperley, C.S., Hoorn, G., Santos, A., Deshpande, H., Wasowski, A.: Robust: 221 bugs in the robot operating system. ArXivabs/2404.03629(2024) 65

    2024 arXiv

  119. [127]

    Journal of Software: Evolution and Process36(6), 2621 (2024)

    Alekseev, Y., Onischuck, M., Zorin, A., Chernyi, V., Iliyn, E., Itsykson, V.: Atsm: A coverage-based framework and a tool for test suite minimization. Journal of Software: Evolution and Process36(6), 2621 (2024)

    2024

  120. [128]

    In: Proceedings of the 29th ACM International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems, Volume 2

    Bai, J.-J., Song, H.-X., Hu, S.-M.: Multi-dimensional and message-guided fuzzing for robotic programs in robot operating system. In: Proceedings of the 29th ACM International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems, Volume 2. ASPLOS ...

    2024

  121. [129]

    In: 2022 IEEE Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation (ICST), pp

    Becho, J., Cerveira, F., Leit˜ ao, J., Oliveira, R.A.: Tesrac: A framework for test suite reduction assessment at scale. In: 2022 IEEE Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation (ICST), pp. 174–184 (2022). IEEE

    2022

  122. [130]

    In: Proceedings of the 32nd ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis, pp

    Liu, Y., Zhang, J., Nie, P., Gligoric, M., Legunsen, O.: More precise regression test selection via reasoning about semantics-modifying changes. In: Proceedings of the 32nd ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis, pp. 664–676 (2023)

    2023

  123. [131]

    Automated Software Engineering31(1), 9 (2024)

    Mafi, Z., Mirian-Hosseinabadi, S.-H.: Regression test selection in test-driven development. Automated Software Engineering31(1), 9 (2024)

    2024

  124. [132]

    In: 2021 IEEE International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (SANER), pp

    Kauhanen, E., Nurminen, J.K., Mikkonen, T., Pashkovskiy, M.: Regression test selection tool for python in continuous integration process. In: 2021 IEEE International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (SANER), pp. 618–621 (2021). IEEE

    2021

  125. [133]

    ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology33(7), 1–23 (2024)

    Lou, Y., Yang, J., Benton, S., Hao, D., Tan, L., Chen, Z., Zhang, L., Zhang, L.: When automated program repair meets regression testing—an extensive study on two million patches. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology33(7), 1–23 (2024)

    2024

  126. [134]

    In: 2021 IEEE 45th Annual Computers, Software, and Applications Conference (COMPSAC), pp

    Xu, J., Du, Q., Li, X.: A requirement-based regression test selection technique in behavior-driven development. In: 2021 IEEE 45th Annual Computers, Software, and Applications Conference (COMPSAC), pp. 1303–1308 (2021). IEEE

    2021

  127. [135]

    In: Proceedings of the 44th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice, pp

    Elsner, D., Wuersching, R., Schnappinger, M., Pretschner, A., Graber, M., Dammer, R., Reimer, S.: Build system aware multi-language regression test selection in continuous integration. In: Proceedings of the 44th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engin...

    2022

  128. [136]

    ACM Transactions on Software Engineer- ing and Methodology33(7), 1–32 (2024) 66

    Huang, D., Bu, Q., Fu, Y., Qing, Y., Xie, X., Chen, J., Cui, H.: Neuron sensitivity-guided test case selection. ACM Transactions on Software Engineer- ing and Methodology33(7), 1–32 (2024) 66

    2024

  129. [137]

    In: Proceedings of the 44th International Conference on Software Engineering, pp

    Gao, X., Feng, Y., Yin, Y., Liu, Z., Chen, Z., Xu, B.: Adaptive test selection for deep neural networks. In: Proceedings of the 44th International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 73–85 (2022)

    2022

  130. [138]

    Information and Software Technology132, 106498 (2021)

    Ibias, A., N´ u˜ nez, M., Hierons, R.M.: Using mutual information to test from finite state machines: Test suite selection. Information and Software Technology132, 106498 (2021)

    2021

  131. [139]

    In: 2023 IEEE International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (SANER), pp

    Hao, Y., Huang, Z., Guo, H., Shen, G.: Test input selection for deep neural network enhancement based on multiple-objective optimization. In: 2023 IEEE International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (SANER), pp. 534–545 (2023). IEEE

    2023

  132. [140]

    ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology33(8), 1–31 (2024)

    Guizzo, G., Williams, D., Harman, M., Petke, J., Sarro, F.: Speeding up genetic improvement via regression test selection. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology33(8), 1–31 (2024)

    2024

  133. [141]

    Journal of Systems and Software205, 111802 (2023)

    Dobslaw, F., Wan, R., Hao, Y.: Generic and industrial scale many-criteria regression test selection. Journal of Systems and Software205, 111802 (2023)

    2023

  134. [142]

    ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology32(1), 1–47 (2023)

    Arrieta, A., Valle, P., Agirre, J.A., Sagardui, G.: Some seeds are strong: Seeding strategies for search-based test case selection. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology32(1), 1–47 (2023)

    2023

  135. [143]

    In: 2023 IEEE Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation (ICST), pp

    Elsner, D., Kacianka, S., Lipp, S., Pretschner, A., Habermann, A., Graber, M., Reimer, S.: Binaryrts: Cross-language regression test selection for c++ binaries in ci. In: 2023 IEEE Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation (ICST), pp. 327–338 (2023). IEEE

    2023

  136. [144]

    In: 2022 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME), pp

    d’Aragona, D.A., Pecorelli, F., Romano, S., Scanniello, G., Baldassarre, M.T., Janes, A., Lenarduzzi, V.: Catto: Just-in-time test case selection and execution. In: 2022 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME), pp. 459–463 (2022). IEEE

    2022

  137. [145]

    In: 2023 IEEE/ACM 45th Inter- national Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), pp

    Yu, J., Wu, Y., Xie, X., Le, W., Ma, L., Chen, Y., Hu, J., Zhang, F.: Gamerts: A regression testing framework for video games. In: 2023 IEEE/ACM 45th Inter- national Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), pp. 1393–1404 (2023). IEEE

    2023

  138. [146]

    IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering49(12), 5250–5278 (2023)

    Sun, W., Yan, M., Liu, Z., Lo, D.: Robust test selection for deep neural networks. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering49(12), 5250–5278 (2023)

    2023

  139. [147]

    In: Proceedings of the 33rd ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis, pp

    Demir, D., Betin Can, A., Surer, E.: Test selection for deep neural networks using meta-models with uncertainty metrics. In: Proceedings of the 33rd ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis, pp. 678– 690 (2024) 67

    2024

  140. [148]

    In: 2023 60th ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference (DAC), pp

    Liang, R., Pinckney, N., Chai, Y., Ren, H., Khailany, B.: Late breaking results: Test selection for rtl coverage by unsupervised learning from fast functional simulation. In: 2023 60th ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference (DAC), pp. 1–2 (2023). IEEE

    2023

  141. [149]

    Science of Computer Programming226, 102926 (2023)

    Birchler, C., Ganz, N., Khatiri, S., Gambi, A., Panichella, S.: Cost-effective simulation-based test selection in self-driving cars software. Science of Computer Programming226, 102926 (2023)

    2023

  142. [150]

    IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics 52(12), 13168–13180 (2021)

    Li, Y., Wang, X., Lu, N., Jiang, B.: Conditional joint distribution-based test selection for fault detection and isolation. IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics 52(12), 13168–13180 (2021)

    2021

  143. [151]

    In: Proceedings of the 32nd ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis, pp

    Bao, S., Sha, C., Chen, B., Peng, X., Zhao, W.: In defense of simple techniques for neural network test case selection. In: Proceedings of the 32nd ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis, pp. 501–513 (2023)

    2023

  144. [152]

    In: 2023 IEEE International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (SANER), pp

    Zhang, L., Cui, B., Zhang, Z.: Optimizing continuous integration by dynamic test proportion selection. In: 2023 IEEE International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (SANER), pp. 438–449 (2023). IEEE

    2023

  145. [153]

    In: 2023 38th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE), pp

    Birchler, C., Rohrbach, C., Kim, H., Gambi, A., Liu, T., Horneber, J., Kehrer, T., Panichella, S.: Teaser: simulation-based can bus regression testing for self- driving cars software. In: 2023 38th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE), pp. ...

    2023

  146. [154]

    ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology32(4), 1–39 (2023)

    Jin, X., Servant, F.: Hybridcisave: A combined build and test selection approach in continuous integration. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology32(4), 1–39 (2023)

    2023

  147. [155]

    851–862 (2020)

    Harel-Canada, F., Wang, L., Gulzar, M.A., Gu, Q., Kim, M.: Is neuron coverage a meaningful measure for testing deep neural networks? In: Proceedings of the 28th ACM Joint Meeting on European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineeri...

    2020

  148. [156]

    In: 2018 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pp

    Strickland, M., Fainekos, G., Amor, H.B.: Deep predictive models for collision risk assessment in autonomous driving. In: 2018 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pp. 4685–4692 (2018). IEEE

    2018

  149. [157]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.02025 (2025)

    Luo, S., Zhang, Y., Deng, Y., Zheng, X.: From accidents to insights: Leveraging multimodal data for scenario-driven ads testing. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.02025 (2025)

    2025

  150. [158]

    In: International Conference on Decision and Game Theory for Security, pp

    Noorani, M., Puthanveettil, T.V., Zoulkarni, A., Mirenzi, J., Grody, C.D., Baras, J.S.: Multimodal anomaly detection for autonomous cyber-physical systems empowering real-world evaluation. In: International Conference on Decision and Game Theory for Security, pp. 306–325 (2024...

    2024

  151. [159]

    International Journal of Information Technology, 1–23 (2025)

    Kashyap, A.K., Konathalapalli, K.: Autonomous navigation of ros2 based turtlebot3 in static and dynamic environments using intelligent approach. International Journal of Information Technology, 1–23 (2025)

    2025

  152. [160]

    https://www

    Looman, T.: Unreal Engine 5.5 Performance Highlights. https://www. tomlooman.com/unreal-engine-5-5-performance-highlights/ (2024)

    2024

  153. [161]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.11400 (2025)

    Jiang, Y., Deng, Y., Schroder, S., Liang, L., Gambhir, S., James, A., Seth, A., Pirrie, J., Zhang, Y., Zheng, X.: A step-by-step guide to creating a robust autonomous drone testing pipeline. arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.11400 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  154. [162]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.16914 (2024)

    Li, C., Sifakis, J., Yan, R., Zhang, J.: Rigorous simulation-based testing for autonomous driving systems–targeting the achilles’ heel of four open autopilots. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.16914 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  155. [163]

    In: Advances in Computers vol

    Pezze, M., Zhang, C.: Automated test oracles: A survey. In: Advances in Computers vol. 95, pp. 1–48. Elsevier, ??? (2014)

    2014

  156. [164]

    In: 2023 49th Euromi- cro Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA), pp

    Duque-Torres, A., Klammer, C., Pfahl, D., Fischer, S., Ramler, R.: Towards automatic generation of amplified regression test oracles. In: 2023 49th Euromi- cro Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA), pp. 332–339 (2023). IEEE

    2023

  157. [165]

    In: 2021 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automation of Software Test (AST), pp

    Arrieta, A., Ayerdi, J., Illarramendi, M., Agirre, A., Sagardui, G., Arratibel, M.: Using machine learning to build test oracles: an industrial case study on elevators dispatching algorithms. In: 2021 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automation of Software Test (AST), pp. ...

    2021

  158. [166]

    In: Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Test Oracles, pp

    Fontes, A., Gay, G.: Using machine learning to generate test oracles: A system- atic literature review. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Test Oracles, pp. 1–10 (2021)

    2021

  159. [167]

    In: 2015 IEEE/ACM 37th IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering, vol

    Gligoric, M., Eloussi, L., Marinov, D.: Ekstazi: Lightweight test selection. In: 2015 IEEE/ACM 37th IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering, vol. 2, pp. 713–716 (2015). IEEE

    2015

  160. [168]

    In: 2017 32nd IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE), pp

    Legunsen, O., Shi, A., Marinov, D.: Starts: Static regression test selection. In: 2017 32nd IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE), pp. 949–954 (2017). IEEE

    2017

  161. [169]

    ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology33, 1–32 (2022)

    Neelofar, N., Aleti, A.: Identifying and explaining safety-critical scenarios for autonomous vehicles via key features. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology33, 1–32 (2022)

    2022

  162. [170]

    In: 2024 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition 69 (CVPR), pp

    Zhou, Y., Zhang, H., Yu, J., Yang, Y., Jung, S., Park, S.-I., Yoo, B.: Himap: Hybrid representation learning for end-to-end vectorized hd map construction. In: 2024 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition 69 (CVPR), pp. 15396–15406 (2024). https://doi.or...

    2024

  163. [171]

    In: 2023 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pp

    Feng, L., Li, Q., Peng, Z., Tan, S., Zhou, B.: Trafficgen: Learning to generate diverse and realistic traffic scenarios. In: 2023 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pp. 3567–3575 (2023). IEEE

    2023

  164. [172]

    IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing62, 1–14 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2023.3347661

    Yan, Y., Yue, J., Lin, J., Guo, Z., Fang, Y., Li, Z., Xie, W., Fang, L.: When vectorization meets change detection. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing62, 1–14 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2023.3347661

    2024

  165. [173]

    In: International Conference on Machine Learning (2022)

    Liu, Y., Wang, Y., Wang, Y., Zhao, H.: Vectormapnet: End-to-end vectorized hd map learning. In: International Conference on Machine Learning (2022)

    2022

  166. [174]

    In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pp

    Jiang, B., Chen, S., Xu, Q., Liao, B., Chen, J., Zhou, H., Zhang, Q., Liu, W., Huang, C., Wang, X.: Vad: Vectorized scene representation for efficient autonomous driving. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pp. 8340–8350 (2023)

    2023

  167. [175]

    In: Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol

    Hirschorn, O., Jevnisek, A., Avidan, S.: Optimize & reduce: a top-down approach for image vectorization. In: Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 38, pp. 2148–2156 (2024)

    2024

  168. [176]

    In: International Conference on Machine Learning, pp

    Radford, A., Kim, J.W., Hallacy, C., Ramesh, A., Goh, G., Agarwal, S., Sastry, G., Askell, A., Mishkin, P., Clark, J.,et al.: Learning transferable visual mod- els from natural language supervision. In: International Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 8748–8763 (2021). PmLR

    2021

  169. [177]

    Advances in neural information processing systems36, 34892–34916 (2023)

    Liu, H., Li, C., Wu, Q., Lee, Y.J.: Visual instruction tuning. Advances in neural information processing systems36, 34892–34916 (2023)

    2023

  170. [178]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.12948 (2025)

    Guo, D., Yang, D., Zhang, H., Song, J., Zhang, R., Xu, R., Zhu, Q., Ma, S., Wang, P., Bi, X., et al.: Deepseek-r1: Incentivizing reasoning capability in llms via reinforcement learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.12948 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  171. [179]

    Journal of Machine Learning Research24(240), 1–113 (2023)

    Chowdhery, A., Narang, S., Devlin, J., Bosma, M., Mishra, G., Roberts, A., Barham, P., Chung, H.W., Sutton, C., Gehrmann, S.,et al.: Palm: Scaling lan- guage modeling with pathways. Journal of Machine Learning Research24(240), 1–113 (2023)

    2023

  172. [180]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.11805 (2023)

    Team, G., Anil, R., Borgeaud, S., Alayrac, J.-B., Yu, J., Soricut, R., Schalkwyk, J., Dai, A.M., Hauth, A., Millican, K., et al.: Gemini: a family of highly capable multimodal models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.11805 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  173. [181]

    IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering50(4), 911–936 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE

    Wang, J., Huang, Y., Chen, C., Liu, Z., Wang, S., Wang, Q.: Software testing with large language models: Survey, landscape, and vision. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering50(4), 911–936 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE. 70 2024.3368208

    2024

  174. [182]

    International Journal of Oral Science15(1), 29 (2023)

    Huang, H., Zheng, O., Wang, D., Yin, J., Wang, Z., Ding, S., Yin, H., Xu, C., Yang, R., Zheng, Q.,et al.: Chatgpt for shaping the future of dentistry: the potential of multi-modal large language model. International Journal of Oral Science15(1), 29 (2023)

    2023

  175. [183]

    In: Proceedings of the 39th IEEE/ACM Interna- tional Conference on Automated Software Engineering

    Guo, A., Zhou, Y., Tian, H., Fang, C., Sun, Y., Sun, W., Gao, X., Luu, A.T., Liu, Y., Chen, Z.: Sovar: Build generalizable scenarios from accident reports for autonomous driving testing. In: Proceedings of the 39th IEEE/ACM Interna- tional Conference on Automated Software Engi...

    2024

  176. [184]

    In: Companion Proceedings of the 32nd ACM International Conference on the Foundations of Software Engineering

    Alshahwan, N., Chheda, J., Finogenova, A., Gokkaya, B., Harman, M., Harper, I., Marginean, A., Sengupta, S., Wang, E.: Automated unit test improve- ment using large language models at meta. In: Companion Proceedings of the 32nd ACM International Conference on the Foundations o...

    2024

  177. [185]

    In: 2024 IEEE Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation (ICST), pp

    Rahman, S., Baz, A., Misailovic, S., Shi, A.: Quantizing large-language mod- els for predicting flaky tests. In: 2024 IEEE Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation (ICST), pp. 93–104 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1109/ ICST60714.2024.00018

    2024

  178. [186]

    In: Proceedings of the 33rd ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis

    Lu, Y., Tian, Y., Bi, Y., Chen, B., Peng, X.: Diavio: Llm-empowered diag- nosis of safety violations in ads simulation testing. In: Proceedings of the 33rd ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis. ISSTA 2024, pp. 376–388. Association for Computing ...

    2024

  179. [187]

    In: 2024 IEEE 23rd International Conference on Trust, Security and Privacy in Computing and Communications (TrustCom), pp

    Li, Y., Hou, Z., Liu, H.: Large language model and behaviour tree based real- world test scenario generation for autonomous vehicles. In: 2024 IEEE 23rd International Conference on Trust, Security and Privacy in Computing and Communications (TrustCom), pp. 1770–1775 (2024). ht...

    2024

  180. [188]

    Lu, Z., Afridi, I., Kang, H.J., Ruchkin, I., Zheng, X.: Surveying neuro-symbolic approaches for reliable artificial intelligence of things. J. Reliab. Intell. Environ. 10, 257–279 (2024)

    2024

  181. [189]

    Nature Computational Science4(2), 110–118 (2024) 71

    Blazek, P.J., Venkatesh, K., Lin, M.M.: Automated discovery of algorithms from data. Nature Computational Science4(2), 110–118 (2024) 71

    2024

  182. [190]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems36, 50838–50858 (2023)

    Delfosse, Q., Shindo, H., Dhami, D., Kersting, K.: Interpretable and explainable logical policies via neurally guided symbolic abstraction. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems36, 50838–50858 (2023)

    2023

  183. [191]

    In: Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (2024)

    Marconato, E., Bortolotti, S., Krieken, E., Vergari, A., Passerini, A., Teso, S.: Bears make neuro-symbolic models aware of their reasoning shortcuts. In: Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (2024)

    2024

  184. [192]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.19137 (2023)

    Singireddy, S., Nwaorgu, P., Beckus, A., McKinney, A., Enyioha, C., Jha, S.K., Atia, G.K., Velasquez, A.: Automaton distillation: Neuro-symbolic trans- fer learning for deep reinforcement learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.19137 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  185. [193]

    In: 2023 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recogni- tion (CVPR), pp

    Hsu, J., Mao, J., Wu, J.: Ns3d: Neuro-symbolic grounding of 3d objects and rela- tions. In: 2023 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recogni- tion (CVPR), pp. 2614–2623 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR52729.2023. 00257

    2023

  186. [195]

    In: 2024 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), pp

    Zhao, Z., Li, B., Du, Y., Fu, T., Wang, C.: Physord: A neuro-symbolic approach for physics-infused motion prediction in off-road driving. In: 2024 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), pp. 11670– 11677 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1109/IROS5...

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.