Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Praveen Kallakuri
dblp:24/1960
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2004
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 3
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 · 90% Empirical software engineering · 10% |
Topics — the 5 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Software testing
regression testing |
0.1 | 2 | 2004 | On test suite composition and cost-effective regression testing · ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 2004 The impact of test suite granularity on the cost-effectiveness of regression testing · ICSE 2002 |
Software testing › regression testing
regression test selection |
0.0 | 1 | 2004 | On test suite composition and cost-effective regression testing · ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 2004 |
Software testing › regression testing
test case prioritization |
0.0 | 1 | 2004 | On test suite composition and cost-effective regression testing · ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 2004 |
Software testing › regression testing
test suite reduction |
0.0 | 1 | 2004 | On test suite composition and cost-effective regression testing · ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 2004 |
Empirical software engineering
controlled experiment |
0.0 | 2 | 2004 | On test suite composition and cost-effective regression testing · ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 2004 The impact of test suite granularity on the cost-effectiveness of regression testing · ICSE 2002 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
controlled experiment · 0.1
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2004 | On test suite composition and cost-effective regression testingabstractRegression testing is an expensive testing process used to revalidate software as it evolves. Various methodologies for improving regression testing processes have been explored, but the cost-effectiveness of these methodologies has been shown to vary with characteristics of regression test suites. One such characteristic involves the way in which test inputs are composed into test cases within a test suite. This article reports the results of controlled experiments examining the effects of two factors in test suite composition---test suite granularity and test input grouping---on the costs and benefits of several regression-testing-related methodologies: retest-all, regression test selection, test suite reduction, and test case prioritization. These experiments consider the application of several specific techniques, from each of these methodologies, across ten releases each of two substantial software systems, using seven levels of test suite granularity and two types of test input grouping. The effects of granularity, technique, and grouping on the cost and fault-detection effectiveness of regression testing under the given methodologies are analyzed. This analysis shows that test suite granularity significantly affects several cost-benefit factors for the methodologies considered, while test input grouping has limited effects. Further, the results expose essential tradeoffs affecting the relationship between test suite design and regression testing cost-effectiveness, with several implications for practice. Gregg Rothermel, Sebastian G. Elbaum, Alexey G. Malishevsky, Praveen Kallakuri, Xuemei Qiu |
ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. | 4 |
| 2003 | Understanding the effects of changes on the cost-effectiveness of regression testing techniquesabstractAbstract Regression testing is an expensive testing process used to validate modified software. Regression test selection and test‐case prioritization can reduce the costs of regression testing by selecting a subset of test cases for execution, or scheduling test cases to meet testing objectives better. The cost‐effectiveness of these techniques can vary widely, however, and one cause of this variance is the type and magnitude of changes made in producing a new software version. Engineers unaware of the causes and effects of this variance can make poor choices in designing change integration processes, selecting inappropriate regression testing techniques, designing excessively expensive regression test suites and making unnecessarily costly changes. Engineers aware of causal factors can perform regression testing more cost‐effectively. This article reports the results of an embedded multiple case study investigating the modifications made in the evolution of four software systems and their impact on regression testing techniques. The results of this study expose tradeoffs and constraints that affect the success of techniques and provide guidelines for designing and managing regression testing processes. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Sebastian G. Elbaum, Praveen Kallakuri, Alexey G. Malishevsky, Gregg Rothermel, Satya Kanduri |
Softw. Test. Verification Reliab. | 2 |
| 2002 | The impact of test suite granularity on the cost-effectiveness of regression testingabstractRegression testing is an expensive testing process used to validate software following modifications. The cost-effectiveness of regression testing techniques varies with characteristics of test suites. One such characteristic, test suite granularity, involves the way in which test inputs are grouped into test cases within a test suite. Various cost-benefits tradeoffs have been attributed to choices of test suite granularity, but almost no research has formally examined these tradeoffs. To address this lack, we conducted several controlled experiments, examining the effects of test suite granularity on the costs and benefits of several regression testing methodologies across six releases of two non-trivial software systems. Our results expose essential tradeoffs to consider when designing test suites for use in regression testing evolving systems. Gregg Rothermel, Sebastian G. Elbaum, Alexey G. Malishevsky, Praveen Kallakuri, Brian Davia |
ICSE | 4 |