Christopher DuPuis

dblp:96/4256 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2001
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2

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 · 100%
Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper
User interface design and tools · 100%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Software testing › test adequacy › test adequacy criteria
data flow testing criteria
0.012001
A methodology for testing spreadsheets · ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 2001
Software testing
spreadsheet testing
0.012001
A methodology for testing spreadsheets · ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 2001
Software testing › test adequacy
test adequacy criteria
0.012001
A methodology for testing spreadsheets · ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 2001
User interface design and tools
end-user programming
0.011998
What You See Is What You Test: A Methodology for Testing Form-Based Visual Programs · ICSE 1998

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

empirical study · 0.0data flow analysis · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2001 A methodology for testing spreadsheets
abstract
Spreadsheet languages, which include commercial spreadsheets and various research systems, have had a substantial impact on end-user computing. Research shows, however, that spreadsheets often contain faults; thus, we would like to provide at least some of the benefits of formal testing methodologies to the creators of spreadsheets. This article presents a testing methodology that adapts data flow adequacy criteria and coverage monitoring to the task of testing spreadsheets. To accommodate the evaluation model used with spreadsheets, and the interactive process by which they are created, our methodology is incremental. To accommodate the users of spreadsheet languages, we provide an interface to our methodology that does not require an understanding of testing theory. We have implemented our testing methodology in the context of the Forms/3 visual spreadsheet language. We report on the methodology, its time and space costs, and the mapping from the testing strategy to the user interface. In an empirical study, we found that test suites created according to our methodology detected, on average, 81% of the faults in a set of faulty spreadsheets, significantly outperforming randomly generated test suites.
Gregg Rothermel, Margaret M. Burnett, Christopher DuPuis, Andrei Sheretov
ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol.4
1998 What You See Is What You Test: A Methodology for Testing Form-Based Visual Programs
abstract
Form-based visual programming languages, which include commercial spreadsheets and various research systems, have had a substantial impact on end-user computing. Research shows, however, that form-based visual programs often contain faults. We would like to provide at least some of the benefits of formal testing methodologies to the creators of these programs. This paper presents a testing methodology for form-based visual programs. To accommodate the evaluation model used with these programs, and the interactive process by which they are created, our methodology is validation driven and incremental. To accommodate the users of these languages, We provide an interface to the methodology that does not require an understanding of testing theory. We discuss our implementation of this methodology and empirical results achieved in its use.
Gregg Rothermel, Christopher DuPuis, Margaret M. Burnett
ICSE3