Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Nariman Mirzaei
dblp:117/5454
· DBLP profile ↗
4ranked-venue papers
2as first author
0since 2021 · last 2017
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 4 · 2 first-author
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
2 papers |
Software testing · 81% Program analysis · 19% |
Topics — the 6 heaviest of 7, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Software testing
test generation |
0.4 | 2 | 2016 | Reducing combinatorics in GUI testing of android applications · ICSE 2016 EvoDroid: segmented evolutionary testing of Android apps · SIGSOFT FSE 2014 |
Program analysis
control flow analysis |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Reducing combinatorics in GUI testing of android applications · ICSE 2016 |
Software testing
GUI testing |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Reducing combinatorics in GUI testing of android applications · ICSE 2016 |
Software testing › model-based testing
model-based test generation |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Reducing combinatorics in GUI testing of android applications · ICSE 2016 |
Software testing
automated testing |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | EvoDroid: segmented evolutionary testing of Android apps · SIGSOFT FSE 2014 |
Software testing › test generation › search-based test generation
evolutionary testing |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | EvoDroid: segmented evolutionary testing of Android apps · SIGSOFT FSE 2014 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
program analysis · 0.4constraint solving · 0.2combinatorial testing · 0.2evolutionary algorithm · 0.2
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | Mutation operators for testing Android apps
Lin Deng 0001, A. Jefferson Offutt, Paul Ammann, Nariman Mirzaei |
Inf. Softw. Technol. | 4 |
| 2016 | Reducing combinatorics in GUI testing of android applicationsabstractThe rising popularity of Android and the GUI-driven nature of its apps have motivated the need for applicable automated GUI testing techniques. Although exhaustive testing of all possible combinations is the ideal upper bound in combinatorial testing, it is often infeasible, due to the combinatorial explosion of test cases. This paper presents TrimDroid, a framework for GUI testing of Android apps that uses a novel strategy to generate tests in a combinatorial, yet scalable, fashion. It is backed with automated program analysis and formally rigorous test generation engines. TrimDroid relies on program analysis to extract formal specifications. These specifications express the app's behavior (i.e., control flow between the various app screens) as well as the GUI elements and their dependencies. The dependencies among the GUI elements comprising the app are used to reduce the number of combinations with the help of a solver. Our experiments have corroborated TrimDroid's ability to achieve a comparable coverage as that possible under exhaustive GUI testing using significantly fewer test cases. Nariman Mirzaei, Joshua Garcia, Hamid Bagheri, Sam Malek |
ICSE | 1 |
| 2015 | SIG-Droid: Automated system input generation for Android applicationsabstractPervasiveness of smartphones and the vast number of corresponding apps have underlined the need for applicable automated software testing techniques. A wealth of research has been focused on either unit or GUI testing of smartphone apps, but little on automated support for end-to-end system testing. This paper presents SIG-Droid, a framework for system testing of Android apps, backed with automated program analysis to extract app models and symbolic execution of source code guided by such models for obtaining test inputs that ensure covering each reachable branch in the program. SIG-Droid leverages two automatically extracted models: Interface Model and Behavior Model. The Interface Model is used to find values that an app can receive through its interfaces. Those values are then exchanged with symbolic values to deal with constraints with the help of a symbolic execution engine. The Behavior Model is used to drive the apps for symbolic execution and generate sequences of events. We provide an efficient implementation of SIG-Droid based in part on Symbolic PathFinder, extended in this work to support automatic testing of Android apps. Our experiments show SIG-Droid is able to achieve significantly higher code coverage than existing automated testing tools targeted for Android. Nariman Mirzaei, Hamid Bagheri, Riyadh Mahmood, Sam Malek |
ISSRE | 1 |
| 2014 | EvoDroid: segmented evolutionary testing of Android appsabstractProliferation of Android devices and apps has created a demand for applicable automated software testing techniques. Prior research has primarily focused on either unit or GUI testing of Android apps, but not their end-to-end system testing in a systematic manner. We present EvoDroid, an evolutionary approach for system testing of Android apps. EvoDroid overcomes a key shortcoming of using evolutionary techniques for system testing, i.e., the inability to pass on genetic makeup of good individuals in the search. To that end, EvoDroid combines two novel techniques: (1) an Android-specific program analysis technique that identifies the segments of the code amenable to be searched independently, and (2) an evolutionary algorithm that given information of such segments performs a step-wise search for test cases reaching deep into the code. Our experiments have corroborated EvoDroid’s ability to achieve significantly higher code coverage than existing Android testing tools. Riyadh Mahmood, Nariman Mirzaei, Sam Malek |
SIGSOFT FSE | 2 |