Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data.

Constantin Lehnhoff

dblp:244/6421 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2019
—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 · 67% Debugging and program repair · 33%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Debugging and program repair › failure analysis
failure clustering
0.412019
Failure clustering without coverage · ISSTA 2019
Software testing
regression testing
0.412019
Failure clustering without coverage · ISSTA 2019
Software testing › fault analysis
test failure analysis
0.412019
Failure clustering without coverage · ISSTA 2019

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

clustering · 0.4
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2019 Failure clustering without coverage
abstract
Developing and integrating software in the automotive industry is a complex task and requires extensive testing. An important cost factor in testing and debugging is the time required to analyze failing tests. In the context of regression testing, usually, large numbers of tests fail due to a few underlying faults. Clustering failing tests with respect to their underlying faults can, therefore, help in reducing the required analysis time. In this paper, we propose a clustering technique to group failing hardware-in-the-loop tests based on non-code-based features, retrieved from three different sources. To effectively reduce the analysis effort, the clustering tool selects a representative test for each cluster. Instead of analyzing all failing tests, testers only inspect the representative tests to find the underlying faults. We evaluated the effectiveness and efficiency of our solution in a major automotive company using 86 regression test runs, 8743 failing tests, and 1531 faults. The results show that utilizing our clustering tool, testers can reduce the analysis time more than 60% and find more than 80% of the faults only by inspecting the representative tests.
Mojdeh Golagha, Constantin Lehnhoff, Alexander Pretschner, Hermann Ilmberger
ISSTA2