Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Wojciech Orzeszyna
dblp:142/5543
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2014
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1
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
1 paper |
Software testing · 50% Services computing and microservices · 50% |
Topics — the 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Software testing
mutation testing |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | Overcoming the Equivalent Mutant Problem: A Systematic Literature Review and a Comparative Experiment of Second Order Mutation · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2014 |
Services computing and microservices › middleware
service-oriented middleware |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | Overcoming the Equivalent Mutant Problem: A Systematic Literature Review and a Comparative Experiment of Second Order Mutation · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2014 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
systematic literature review · 0.2comparative experiment · 0.2
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2014 | Overcoming the Equivalent Mutant Problem: A Systematic Literature Review and a Comparative Experiment of Second Order MutationabstractContext. The equivalent mutant problem (EMP) is one of the crucial problems in mutation testing widely studied over decades. Objectives. The objectives are: to present a systematic literature review (SLR) in the field of EMP; to identify, classify and improve the existing, or implement new, methods which try to overcome EMP and evaluate them. Method. We performed SLR based on the search of digital libraries. We implemented four second order mutation (SOM) strategies, in addition to first order mutation (FOM), and compared them from different perspectives. Results. Our SLR identified 17 relevant techniques (in 22 articles) and three categories of techniques: detecting (DEM); suggesting (SEM); and avoiding equivalent mutant generation (AEMG). The experiment indicated that SOM in general and JudyDiffOp strategy in particular provide the best results in the following areas: total number of mutants generated; the association between the type of mutation strategy and whether the generated mutants were equivalent or not; the number of not killed mutants; mutation testing time; time needed for manual classification. Conclusions . The results in the DEM category are still far from perfect. Thus, the SEM and AEMG categories have been developed. The JudyDiffOp algorithm achieved good results in many areas. Lech Madeyski, Wojciech Orzeszyna, Richard Torkar, Mariusz Jozala |
IEEE Trans. Software Eng. | 2 |