The analysis of software product lines is challenging due to the potentially large number of products, which grow exponentially in terms of the number of features. Product sampling is a technique used to avoid exhaustive testing, which is often infeasible. We have proposed a classification for product sampling techniques and classified the existing literature accordingly. We distinguish the important characteristics of such approaches based on the information used for sampling, the kind of algorithm, and the achieved coverage criteria. Furthermore, we give an overview on existing tools and evaluations of product sampling techniques. We share our insights on the state-of-the-art of product sampling and discuss potential future work.
This website is accepted as an official ACM artifact to our publication at SPLC'18 [1]. As the large number of algorithms and our detailed classification give rise to a large space, that is hard to explore only by means of a table in the proceedings. Here, we offer an interactive table with filter and sorting capabilities. Furthermore, product sampling is a very active research area and new algorithms are published several times a year. We aim to keep the table up-to-date, but kindly ask you to report any missing literature and wrong classifications to us. Instead of sending an e-mail it is also possible to propose changes by means of a pull request. In the request, you can add the paper to the file of Bibtex entries, which is used to generate this website. Please note that there is a dedicated entry called sampling-tags containing the classification (e.g., feature model as input data or name=NewAlgorithm to specify the entry in column entitled Algorithm). We will review the changes manually and update the website accordingly.
[1] Mahsa Varshosaz, Mustafa Al-Hajjaji, Thomas Thüm, Tobias Runge, Mohammadreza Mousavi, and Ina Schaefer. A Classification of Product Sampling for Software Product Lines. In Proceedings of the International Software Product Line Conference (SPLC). September 2018. To appear.
Authors | Venue | Year | Title | Algorithm | Input Data | Algorithm Category | Coverage | Evaluation | Application | Further Tags |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Tobias Pett, Sebastian Krieter, Tobias Runge, Thomas Thüm, Malte Lochau, Ina Schaefer | VaMoS | 2021 | Stability of Product-Line Sampling in Continuous Integration | testing efficiency, evaluation | testing | compares Random/Chvatal/ICPL/Incling/YASA | ||||
Juliana Alves Pereira, Mathieu Acher, Hugo Martib, Jean-Marc Jezequel | ICPE | 2020 | Sampling Effect on Performance Prediction of Configurable Systems: A Case Study | effectiveness, open-source tool, evaluation | non-functional properties | compares Coverage-based/Solver-based/Randomized solver-based/Distance-based/Diversified distance-based/Random, JS20 | ||||
Sebastian Krieter, Thomas Thüm, Sandro Schulze, Gunter Saake, Thomas Leich | VaMoS | 2020 | YASA: Yet Another Sampling Algorithm | YASA | feature model, expert knowledge | greedy | t-wise coverage | sampling efficiency, testing efficiency, open-source tool, evaluation | testing | compared to Chvatal/ICPL/IncLing, usage of FeatureIDE/Sat4J, SAT, JS20 |
Quentin Plazar, Mathieu Acher, Gilles Perrouin, Xavier Devroey, Maxime Cordy | ICST | 2019 | Uniform Sampling of SAT Solutions for Configurable Systems: Are We There Yet? | sampling efficiency, effectiveness, open-source tool, evaluation | testing, non-functional properties | compares QuickSampler/UniGen, JS20 | ||||
Axel Halin, Alexandre Nuttinck, Mathieu Acher, Xavier Devroey, Gilles Perrouin, Benoit Baudry | EMSE | 2019 | Test Them All, Is It Worth It? Assessing Configuration Sampling on the JHipster Web Development Stack | testing efficiency, effectiveness, evaluation | testing, type checking | evaluation of ICPL/one-disabled/all-one-disabled/one-enabled/all-one-enabled/most-enabled-disabled/similarity heuristic/random sampling, JS20 | ||||
Christian Kaltenecker, Alexander Grebhahn, Norbert Siegmund, Jianmei Guo, Sven Apel | ICSE | 2019 | Distance-Based Sampling of Software Configuration Spaces | Distance-Based Search | feature model | population-based search | effectiveness, open-source tool, evaluation | non-functional properties | semi-automatic search, compares Distance-Based Search/random sampling/higher-order heuristic/hot-spot heuristic, SPLConqueror, Z3, JS20 | |
Jeho Oh, Paul Gazzillo, Don Batory | SPLC | 2019 | t-wise Coverage by Uniform Sampling | sampling efficiency, testing efficiency, effectiveness, open-source tool, evaluation | testing | submission to PTR+:SPLC19, JS20 | ||||
Jeho Oh, Paul Gazzillo, Don Batory, Marijn Heule, Maggie Myers | (techreport) | 2019 | Uniform Sampling from Kconfig Feature Models | Smarch | feature model | local search | no coverage guarantee | sampling efficiency, effectiveness, open-source tool, evaluation | non-functional properties | JS20 |
Daniel-Jesus Munoz, Jeho Oh, Monica Pinto, Lidia Fuentes, Don Batory | SPLC | 2019 | Uniform Random Sampling Product Configurations of Feature Models That Have Numerical Features | Smarch+BBPF | feature model | local search | no coverage guarantee | sampling efficiency, open-source tool, evaluation | non-functional properties | JS20 |
Lars Luthmann, Timo Gerecht, Malte Lochau | STTT | 2019 | Sampling Strategies for Product Lines with Unbounded Parametric Real-Time Constraints | minimum/maximum-delay testing | feature model, test artifacts | greedy | specification coverage | sampling efficiency, testing efficiency, available tool, evaluation | non-functional properties | IMITATOR, usage of CoPTA/Uppaal/Z3, ILP, SMT, featured timed automata, infinite configuration space |
Tobias Pett, Thomas Thüm, Tobias Runge, Sebastian Krieter, Malte Lochau, Ina Schaefer | SPLC | 2019 | Product Sampling for Product Lines: The Scalability Challenge | feature model | t-wise coverage | sampling efficiency, testing efficiency, effectiveness | testing | challenge | ||
Mustafa Al-Hajjaji, Thomas Thüm, Malte Lochau, Jens Meinicke, Gunter Saake | SoSyM | 2019 | Effective Product-Line Testing Using Similarity-Based Product Prioritization | sampling efficiency, testing efficiency, open-source tool, evaluation | testing | usage of random sampling/CASA/Chvatal/ICPL, SPLC18 | ||||
Sebastian Ruland, Lars Luthmann, Johannes Bürdek, Sascha Lity, Thomas Thüm, Malte Lochau, Marcio Ribeiro | GPCE | 2018 | Measuring Effectiveness of Sample-Based Product-Line Testing | testing efficiency, effectiveness, open-source tool, evaluation | testing | usage of MiLu/CPAchecker/CPATiger/FeatureIDE/ICPL/SiMPOSE | ||||
Jianmei Guo, Dingyu Yang, Norbert Siegmund, Sven Apel, Atrisha Sarkar, Pavel Valov, Krzysztof Czarnecki, Andrzej Wasowski, Huiqun Yu | EMSE | 2018 | Data-Efficient Performance Learning for Configurable Systems | random sampling | feature model | greedy | no coverage guarantee | testing efficiency, open-source tool, evaluation | non-functional properties | DECART, SPLC18 |
Iago Abal, Jean Melo, Stefan Stanciulescu, Claus Brabrand, Marcio Ribeiro, Andrzej Wasowski | TOSEM | 2018 | Variability Bugs in Highly Configurable Systems: A Qualitative Analysis | one-disabled | feature model | greedy | no coverage guarantee | testing efficiency, effectiveness, evaluation | testing | evaluated with real faults, SPLC18 |
Jeho Oh, Don Batory, Margaret Myers, Norbert Siegmund | FSE | 2017 | Finding Near-Optimal Configurations in Product Lines by Random Sampling | NRS | feature model | local search | effectiveness, unavailable tool, evaluation | non-functional properties | JS20 | |
Jeho Oh, Don Batory, Margaret Myers, Norbert Siegmund | FSE | 2017 | Finding Near-Optimal Configurations in Product Lines by Random Sampling | SRS | feature model | local search | effectiveness, unavailable tool, evaluation | non-functional properties | JS20 | |
Thiago N. Ferreira, Jackson A. Prado Lima, Andrei Strickler, Josiel N. Kuk, Silvia R. Vergilio, Aurora Pozo | CIM | 2017 | Hyper-Heuristic Based Product Selection for Software Product Line Testing | SPEA2-HH/IBEA-HH | feature model | population-based search | no coverage guarantee | sampling efficiency, effectiveness, unavailable tool, evaluation | testing | compared to MOEA/D-DRA/NSGA-II, usage of CombTestWeb/FMTS/FaMa, feature-model mutation, SPLC18 |
Axel Halin, Alexandre Nuttinck, Mathieu Acher, Xavier Devroey, Gilles Perrouin, Benoit Baudry | (techreport) | 2017 | Test Them All, Is It worth It? A Ground Truth Comparison of Configuration Sampling Strategies | testing efficiency, effectiveness, evaluation | testing, type checking | evaluation of ICPL/one-disabled/all-one-disabled/one-enabled/all-one-enabled/most-enabled-disabled/similarity heuristic/random sampling, SPLC18, subsumed by HNA+:EMSE19 | ||||
Axel Halin, Alexandre Nuttinck, Mathieu Acher, Xavier Devroey, Gilles Perrouin, Patrick Heymans | VaMoS | 2017 | Yo Variability! JHipster: A Playground for Web-Apps Analyses | testing efficiency, effectiveness, evaluation | testing, type checking | evaluation of ICPL/one-disabled/all-one-disabled/one-enabled/all-one-enabled/most-enabled-disabled/similarity heuristic/random sampling, SPLC18, subsumed by HNA+:EMSE19 | ||||
Helson L. Jakubovski Filho, Jackson A. Prado Lima, Silvia R. Vergilio | SBES | 2017 | Automatic Generation of Search-Based Algorithms Applied to the Feature Testing of Software Product Lines | Filho's generated MOEAs | feature model | population-based search | no coverage guarantee | testing efficiency, effectiveness, unavailable tool, evaluation | testing | compared to NSGAII/NSGAII-HH, usage of CombTestWeb/FMTS, automatic selection, feature-model mutation, SPLC18 |
Norbert Siegmund, Stefan Sobernig, Sven Apel | ESECFSE | 2017 | Attributed Variability Models: Outside the Comfort Zone | |||||||
Alexander Grebhahn, Carmen Rodrigo, Norbert Siegmund, Francisco Jose Gaspar, Sven Apel | CCPE | 2017 | Performance-Influence Models of Multigrid Methods: A Case Study on Triangular Grids | testing efficiency, effectiveness, open-source tool, evaluation | non-functional properties | evaluation of feature-wise heuristic/pair-wise heuristic/negative feature-wise heuristic, SPLConqueror, SPLC18 | ||||
Mustafa Al-Hajjaji, Sascha Lity, Remo Lachmann, Thomas Thüm, Ina Schaefer, Gunter Saake | VACE | 2017 | Delta-Oriented Product Prioritization for Similarity-Based Product-Line Testing | effectiveness, evaluation | testing | usage of MoSo-PoLiTe, SPLC18 | ||||
Rui Angelo Matnei Filho, Silvia Regina Vergilio | JSERD | 2016 | A Multi-Objective Test Data Generation Approach for Mutation Testing of Feature Models | Matnei-Filho's algorithm | feature model | population-based search | no coverage guarantee | testing efficiency, effectiveness, unavailable tool, evaluation | testing | usage of FMTS/FaMa/AETG, automatic selection, feature-model mutation, SPLC18 |
Thiago N. Ferreira, Josiel Neumann Kuk, Aurora Pozo, Silvia Regina Vergilio | CEC | 2016 | Product Selection Based on Upper Confidence Bound MOEA/D-DRA for Testing Software Product Lines | MOEA/D-DRA | feature model | population-based search | no coverage guarantee | effectiveness, unavailable tool, evaluation | testing | usage of CombTestWeb/FMTS, feature-model mutation, SPLC18 |
Stefan Fischer, Roberto E. Lopez-Herrejon, Rudolf Ramler, Alexander Egyed | SBST | 2016 | A Preliminary Empirical Assessment of Similarity for Combinatorial Interaction Testing of Software Product Lines | sampling efficiency, testing efficiency, effectiveness, evaluation | testing | evaluation of CASA/similarity heuristic, SPLC18 | ||||
Mustafa Al-Hajjaji, Sebastian Krieter, Thomas Thüm, Malte Lochau, Gunter Saake | GPCE | 2016 | IncLing: Efficient Product-line Testing Using Incremental Pairwise Sampling | IncLing | feature model, expert knowledge | greedy, semi-automatic selection | pair-wise coverage | sampling efficiency, testing efficiency, effectiveness, open-source tool, evaluation | testing | compared to CASA/Chvatal/ICPL/IPOG/random sampling, automatic selection, SPLC18 |
Mustafa Al-Hajjaji, Jens Meinicke, Sebastian Krieter, Reimar Schröter, Thomas Thüm, Thomas Leich, Gunter Saake | GPCE | 2016 | Tool Demo: Testing Configurable Systems with FeatureIDE | user-defined configurations | feature model, expert knowledge | manual selection | feature-wise coverage | open-source tool | testing, type checking | tool support includes also random sampling/CASA/Chvatal/ICPL/IncLing, FeatureIDE, SPLC18 |
Flavio Medeiros, Christian Kästner, Marcio Ribeiro, Rohit Gheyi, Sven Apel | ICSE | 2016 | A Comparison of 10 Sampling Algorithms for Configurable Systems | one-enabled | feature model | greedy | no coverage guarantee | testing efficiency, effectiveness, open-source tool, evaluation | testing | compared to ICPL/configuration coverage/one-disabled/random sampling, combinations evaluated, evaluated with real faults, SPLC18 |
Flavio Medeiros, Christian Kästner, Marcio Ribeiro, Rohit Gheyi, Sven Apel | ICSE | 2016 | A Comparison of 10 Sampling Algorithms for Configurable Systems | most-enabled-disabled | feature model | greedy | no coverage guarantee | testing efficiency, effectiveness, open-source tool, evaluation | testing | compared to ICPL/configuration coverage/one-disabled/random sampling, combinations evaluated, evaluated with real faults, SPLC18 |
Rui Angelo Matnei Filho, Silvia Regina Vergilio | SBES | 2015 | A Mutation and Multi-Objective Test Data Generation Approach for Feature Testing of Software Product Lines | Matnei-Filho's algorithm | feature model | population-based search | no coverage guarantee | testing efficiency, effectiveness, unavailable tool, evaluation | testing | usage of FMTS/FaMa/AETG, automatic selection, feature-model mutation, SPLC18, subsumed by MFV:JSERD16 |
Atri Sarkar, Jianmei Guo, Norbert Siegmund, Sven Apel, Krzysztof Czarnecki | ASE | 2015 | Cost-Efficient Sampling for Performance Prediction of Configurable Systems | feature-frequency heuristic | feature model | greedy | feature-wise coverage | testing efficiency, effectiveness, open-source tool, evaluation | non-functional properties | compared to pair-wise/3-wise, automatic selection, SPLC18 |
Xavier Devroey, Gilles Perrouin, Axel Legay, Pierre-Yves Schobbens, Patrick Heymans | VaMoS | 2015 | Covering SPL Behaviour with Sampled Configurations: An Initial Assessment | testing efficiency, effectiveness, evaluation | testing | compared to ICPL/similarity heuristic, FTS, SPLC18 | ||||
Norbert Siegmund, Alexander Grebhahn, Sven Apel, Christian Kästner | ESECFSE | 2015 | Performance-Influence Models for Highly Configurable Systems | testing efficiency, effectiveness, open-source tool, evaluation | non-functional properties | evaluation of option-wise/negative option-wise/pair-wise, SPLConqueror, SPLC18 | ||||
Dennis Reuling, Johannes Bürdek, Serge Rotärmel, Malte Lochau, Udo Kelter | SPLC | 2015 | Fault-Based Product-Line Testing: Effective Sample Generation Based on Feature-Diagram Mutation | feature-diagram mutation | feature model | greedy | no coverage guarantee | sampling efficiency, testing efficiency, effectiveness, available tool, evaluation | testing | no prioritization, compared to ICPL, feature-model mutation, SPLC18 |
Paolo Arcaini, Angelo Gargantini, Paolo Vavassori | ICST | 2015 | Generating Tests for Detecting Faults in Feature Models | distinguishing configurations | feature model | greedy | no coverage guarantee | sampling efficiency, testing efficiency, effectiveness, unavailable tool, evaluation | testing, type checking | compared to pairwise sampling/all valid configurations, automatic selection, feature-model mutation, SPLC18 |
Anastasia Cmyrev, Ralf Reissing | IJAST | 2014 | Efficient and Effective Testing of Automotive Software Product Lines | Cmyrev's greedy algorithm | feature model | greedy, semi-automatic selection | feature-wise coverage, requirements coverage | sampling efficiency, testing efficiency, effectiveness, unavailable tool, evaluation | testing | compared to MoSo-PoLiTe, SPLC18 |
Anastasia Cmyrev, Ralf Reissing | IJAST | 2014 | Efficient and Effective Testing of Automotive Software Product Lines | Cmyrev's simulated annealing | feature model | local search, semi-automatic selection | no coverage guarantee | sampling efficiency, testing efficiency, effectiveness, unavailable tool, evaluation | testing | compared to MoSo-PoLiTe, SPLC18 |
Alexander Grebhahn, Sebastian Kuckuk, Christian Schmitt, Harald Köstler, Norbert Siegmund, Sven Apel, Frank Hannig, Jürgen Teich | PPL | 2014 | Experiments on Optimizing the Performance of Stencil Codes with SPL Conqueror | function-learning heuristic | feature model | greedy | no coverage guarantee | testing efficiency, effectiveness, open-source tool, evaluation | non-functional properties | compared to feature-wise heuristic/pair-wise heuristic/higher-order heuristic/hot-spot heuristic, automatic selection, SPLConqueror, SPLC18 |
Roberto Erick Lopez-Herrejon, Javier Ferrer, Francisco Chicano, Alexander Egyed, Enrique Alba | CEC | 2014 | Comparative Analysis of Classical Multi-Objective Evolutionary Algorithms and Seeding Strategies for Pairwise Testing of Software Product Lines | feature model | population-based search | no coverage guarantee | sampling efficiency, testing efficiency, effectiveness, open-source tool, evaluation | testing | usage of SPLAR/FaMa/SPLCA/jMetal, usage of NSGA-II/MOCell/SPEA2/PAES, automatic selection, seeding strategies: size-based random seeding/greedy seeding/single-objective-based seeding, SPLC18 | |
Reinhard Tartler, Christian Dietrich, Julio Sincero, Wolfgang Schröder-Preikschat, Daniel Lohmann | ATC | 2014 | Static Analysis of Variability in System Software: The 90,000 #Ifdefs Issue | vampyr | feature model, implementation artifacts | greedy | no coverage guarantee | effectiveness, open-source tool, evaluation | type checking | SPLC18 |
Reinhard Tartler, Christian Dietrich, Julio Sincero, Wolfgang Schröder-Preikschat, Daniel Lohmann | ATC | 2014 | Static Analysis of Variability in System Software: The 90,000 #Ifdefs Issue | all-yes-config | feature model, expert knowledge | manual selection | no coverage guarantee | effectiveness, evaluation | type checking | SPLC18 |
Hauke Baller, Malte Lochau | FOSD | 2014 | Towards Incremental Test Suite Optimization for Software Product Lines | incremental test-suite optimization | product set, test artifacts | greedy | requirements coverage | unavailable tool | testing | no evaluation, no proof |
Christopher Henard, Mike Papadakis, Yves Le Traon | (incollection) | 2014 | Mutation-Based Generation of Software Product Line Test Configurations | Henard's CNF mutation | feature model | local search | no coverage guarantee | sampling efficiency, testing efficiency, effectiveness, open-source tool, evaluation | testing | compared to random sampling, automatic selection, feature-model mutation, SPLC18 |
Iago Abal, Claus Brabrand, Andrzej Wasowski | ASE | 2014 | 42 Variability Bugs in the Linux Kernel: A Qualitative Analysis | one-disabled | feature model | greedy | no coverage guarantee | testing efficiency, effectiveness, evaluation | testing | evaluated with real faults, subsumed by AMS+:TOSEM18, SPLC18 |
Christopher Henard, Mike Papadakis, Gilles Perrouin, Jacques Klein, Patrick Heymans, Yves Le Traon | TSE | 2014 | Bypassing the Combinatorial Explosion: Using Similarity to Generate and Prioritize T-Wise Test Configurations for Software Product Lines | similarity heuristic | feature model | local search | no coverage guarantee | sampling efficiency, testing efficiency, effectiveness, evaluation | testing | a.k.a. PLEDGE, compared to IPOG/CASA/ICPL, SAT, SPLC18 |
Mustafa Al-Hajjaji, Thomas Thüm, Jens Meinicke, Malte Lochau, Gunter Saake | SPLC | 2014 | Similarity-Based Prioritization in Software Product-Line Testing | sampling efficiency, testing efficiency, open-source tool, evaluation | testing | usage of random sampling/CASA/Chvatal/ICPL, SPLC18, subsumed by ATL+:SoSyM16 | ||||
Hauke Baller, Sascha Lity, Malte Lochau, Ina Schaefer | ICST | 2014 | Multi-Objective Test Suite Optimization for Incremental Product Family Testing | incremental heuristic | product set, test artifacts | greedy | requirements coverage | sampling efficiency, effectiveness, unavailable tool, evaluation | testing | |
Dusica Marijan, Arnaud Gotlieb, Sagar Sen, Aymeric Hervieu | SPLC | 2013 | Practical Pairwise Testing for Software Product Lines | Marijan's configuration generation | feature model | local search | pair-wise coverage | sampling efficiency, testing efficiency, effectiveness, evaluation | testing | usage of PACOGEN, SPLC18 |
Abdel Salam Sayyad, Joseph Ingram, Tim Menzies, Hany Ammar | ASE | 2013 | Scalable Product Line Configuration: A Straw to Break the Camel's Back | usage of jMetal/Z3 | ||||||
Norbert Siegmund, Marko Rosenmüller, Christian Kästner, Paolo G. Giarrusso, Sven Apel, Sergiy S. Kolesnikov | IST | 2013 | Scalable Prediction of Non-functional Properties in Software Product Lines: Footprint and Memory Consumption | interaction-wise heuristic | feature model | greedy | no coverage guarantee | testing efficiency, effectiveness, open-source tool, evaluation | non-functional properties | compared to feature-wise heuristic/pair-wise heuristic, automatic selection, SPLConqueror, SAT, SPLC18 |
Jianmei Guo, Krzysztof Czarnecki, Sven Apel, Norbert Siegmund, Andrzej Wasowski | ASE | 2013 | Variability-Aware Performance Prediction: A Statistical Learning Approach | random sampling | feature model | greedy | no coverage guarantee | testing efficiency, open-source tool, evaluation | non-functional properties | DECART, subsumed by GYS+:EMSE18, SPLC18 |
Evelyn Nicole Haslinger, Roberto E. Lopez-Herrejon, Alexander Egyed | VaMoS | 2013 | Using Feature Model Knowledge to Speed Up the Generation of Covering Arrays | coverage array reduction | feature model | greedy | t-wise coverage | sampling efficiency, testing efficiency, unavailable tool, evaluation | testing | evaluation with ICPL, automatic selection, SPLC18 |
Norbert Siegmund, Alexander von Rhein, Sven Apel | GPCE | 2013 | Family-Based Performance Measurement | testing efficiency, effectiveness, evaluation | non-functional properties | evaluation of feature-wise heuristic/pair-wise heuristic, SPLC18 | ||||
Christopher Henard, Mike Papadakis, Gilles Perrouin, Jacques Klein, Yves Le Traon | SPLC | 2013 | Multi-Objective Test Generation for Software Product Lines | moga | feature model, expert knowledge | population-based search, semi-automatic selection | no coverage guarantee | sampling efficiency, testing efficiency, effectiveness, open-source tool, evaluation | testing | compared to random sampling, SPLC18 |
Matthias Kowal, Sandro Schulze, Ina Schaefer | VariComp | 2013 | Towards Efficient SPL Testing by Variant Reduction | feature-model filtering | feature model, expert knowledge | greedy | t-wise coverage | sampling efficiency, testing efficiency, evaluation | testing | no tool, compared to ICPL, SPLC18 |
Jörg Liebig, Alexander von Rhein, Christian Kästner, Sven Apel, Jens Dörre, Christian Lengauer | ESECFSE | 2013 | Scalable Analysis of Variable Software | single-conf heuristic | feature model, expert knowledge | manual selection | no coverage guarantee | sampling efficiency, testing efficiency, open-source tool, evaluation | type checking, data-flow analysis | no prioritization, compared to configuration coverage/ICPL/family-based analysis, SPLC18 |
Jörg Liebig, Alexander von Rhein, Christian Kästner, Sven Apel, Jens Dörre, Christian Lengauer | ESECFSE | 2013 | Scalable Analysis of Variable Software | random sampling | feature model | greedy | no coverage guarantee | sampling efficiency, testing efficiency, open-source tool, evaluation | type checking, data-flow analysis | no prioritization, compared to configuration coverage/ICPL/family-based analysis, SPLC18 |
Chang Hwan Peter Kim, Darko Marinov, Sarfraz Khurshid, Don Batory, Sabrina Souto, Paulo Barros, Marcelo D'Amorim | ESECFSE | 2013 | SPLat: Lightweight Dynamic Analysis for Reducing Combinatorics in Testing Configurable Systems | |||||||
Norbert Siegmund, Sergiy S. Kolesnikov, Christian Kästner, Sven Apel, Don Batory, Marko Rosenmüller, Gunter Saake | ICSE | 2012 | Predicting Performance via Automated Feature-Interaction Detection | higher-order heuristic/hot-spot heuristic | feature model | greedy | no coverage guarantee | testing efficiency, effectiveness, open-source tool, evaluation | non-functional properties | compared to feature-wise/pair-wise/all valid configurations, automatic selection, SPLConqueror, SAT, SPLC18 |
Norbert Siegmund, Marko Rosenmüller, Martin Kuhlemann, Christian Kästner, Sven Apel, Gunter Saake | SQJ | 2012 | SPL Conqueror: Toward Optimization of Non-functional Properties in Software Product Lines | feature-wise heuristic | feature model | greedy | feature-wise coverage | testing efficiency, effectiveness, open-source tool, evaluation | non-functional properties | automatic selection, SPLConqueror, SAT, SPLC18 |
Norbert Siegmund, Marko Rosenmüller, Martin Kuhlemann, Christian Kästner, Sven Apel, Gunter Saake | SQJ | 2012 | SPL Conqueror: Toward Optimization of Non-functional Properties in Software Product Lines | pair-wise heuristic | feature model | greedy | pair-wise coverage | testing efficiency, effectiveness, open-source tool, evaluation | non-functional properties | automatic selection, SPLConqueror, SAT, SPLC18 |
Faezeh Ensan, Ebrahim Bagheri, Dragan Gasevic | (incollection) | 2012 | Evolutionary Search-Based Test Generation for Software Product Line Feature Models | gasplt | feature model | local search | no coverage guarantee | testing efficiency, effectiveness, open-source tool, evaluation | testing | usage of FAMA, automatic selection, SPLC18 |
Martin Fagereng Johansen, Oystein Haugen, Franck Fleurey | SPLC | 2012 | An Algorithm for Generating T-Wise Covering Arrays from Large Feature Models | ICPL | feature model | greedy | t-wise coverage | sampling efficiency, testing efficiency, open-source tool, evaluation | testing | compared to CASA/IPOG/MoSo-PoLiTe, a.k.a. SPLCAT, SPLC18 |
Martin Fagereng Johansen, Oystein Haugen, Franck Fleurey, Anne Grete Eldegard, Torbjorn Syversen | (incollection) | 2012 | Generating Better Partial Covering Arrays by Modeling Weights on Sub-Product Lines | weight coverage | feature model, expert knowledge | greedy, semi-automatic selection | no coverage guarantee | testing efficiency, effectiveness, open-source tool, evaluation | testing | compared to ICPL, usage of ICPL, SPLC18 |
Gilles Perrouin, Sebastian Oster, Sagar Sen, Jacques Klein, Benoit Baudry, Yves Le Traon | SQJ | 2012 | Pairwise Testing for Software Product Lines: Comparison of Two Approaches | sampling efficiency, testing efficiency, evaluation | testing | evaluation of Alloy-based sampling/MoSo-PoLiTe, SPLC18 | ||||
Jiangfan Shi, Myra B. Cohen, Matthew B. Dwyer | FASE | 2012 | Integration Testing of Software Product Lines Using Compositional Symbolic Execution | Shi's dataflow analysis | feature model, implementation artifacts | greedy | t-wise coverage, code coverage | sampling efficiency, unavailable tool, evaluation | testing | SPLC18 |
Reinhard Tartler, Daniel Lohmann, Christian Dietrich, Christoph Egger, Julio Sincero | OSR | 2012 | Configuration Coverage in the Analysis of Large-Scale System Software | all-yes-config | feature model, expert knowledge | manual selection | no coverage guarantee | sampling efficiency, effectiveness, open-source tool, evaluation | type checking | no prioritization, SPLC18 |
Reinhard Tartler, Daniel Lohmann, Christian Dietrich, Christoph Egger, Julio Sincero | OSR | 2012 | Configuration Coverage in the Analysis of Large-Scale System Software | configuration coverage | feature model, implementation artifacts | greedy | code coverage | sampling efficiency, effectiveness, open-source tool, evaluation | type checking | no prioritization, Undertaker, SPLC18 |
Sebastian Oster, Marius Zink, Malte Lochau, Mark Grechanik | SPLC | 2011 | Pairwise Feature-Interaction Testing for SPLs: Potentials and Limitations | testing efficiency, effectiveness, unavailable tool, evaluation | testing | evaluation of MoSo-PoLiTe, SPLC18 | ||||
Alireza Ensan, Ebrahim Bagheri, Mohsen Asadi, Dragan Gasevic, Yevgen Biletskiy | ITNG | 2011 | Goal-Oriented Test Case Selection and Prioritization for Product Line Feature Models | Ensan's algorithm | feature model, expert knowledge | greedy, semi-automatic selection | no coverage guarantee | testing efficiency, evaluation | testing | SPLC18 |
Martin Fagereng Johansen, Oystein Haugen, Franck Fleurey | (incollection) | 2011 | Properties of Realistic Feature Models Make Combinatorial Testing of Product Lines Feasible | Chvatal's algorithm | feature model | greedy | t-wise coverage | sampling efficiency, open-source tool, evaluation | testing | usage of FeatureIDE/SPLAR/Sat4J, automatic selection, sampling efficiency, SPLC18 |
Brady J. Garvin, Myra B. Cohen, Matthew B. Dwyer | EMSE | 2011 | Evaluating Improvements to a Meta-Heuristic Search for Constrained Interaction Testing | CASA | feature model | local search | t-wise coverage | sampling efficiency, testing efficiency, open-source tool, evaluation | testing | automatic selection, compared to CDS:TSE08, SPLC18 |
Chang Hwan Peter Kim, Don Batory, Sarfraz Khurshid | AOSD | 2011 | Reducing Combinatorics in Testing Product Lines | Kim's combinatorial reduction | feature model, implementation artifacts, test artifacts | greedy | code coverage | sampling efficiency, testing efficiency, unavailable tool, evaluation | testing | usage of Sat4J, automatic selection, SPLC18 |
Norbert Siegmund, Marko Rosenmüller, Christian Kästner, Paolo G. Giarrusso, Sven Apel, Sergiy Kolesnikov | SPLC | 2011 | Scalable Prediction of Non-Functional Properties in Software Product Lines | interaction-wise heuristic | feature model | greedy | no coverage guarantee | testing efficiency, effectiveness, open-source tool, evaluation | non-functional properties | compared to feature-wise heuristic/pair-wise heuristic, automatic selection, SPLConqueror, SAT, SPLC18, subsumed by SRK+:IST13 |
Chang Hwan Peter Kim, Don Batory, Sarfraz Khurshid | ASE | 2010 | Eliminating Products to Test in a Software Product Line | Kim's combinatorial reduction | feature model, implementation artifacts, test artifacts | greedy | code coverage | sampling efficiency, testing efficiency, unavailable tool, evaluation | testing | usage of Sat4J, automatic selection, subsumed by KBK:AOSD11, SPLC18 |
Chang Hwan Peter Kim, Eric Bodden, Don Batory, Sarfraz Khurshid | RV | 2010 | Reducing Configurations to Monitor in a Software Product Line | Kim's monitoring technique | feature model, implementation artifacts, test artifacts | greedy | code coverage | sampling efficiency, testing efficiency, unavailable tool, evaluation | testing | automatic selection, SPLC18 |
Gilles Perrouin, Sagar Sen, Jacques Klein, Benoit Baudry, Yves Le Traon | ICST | 2010 | Automated and Scalable T-Wise Test Case Generation Strategies for Software Product Lines | Alloy-based sampling | feature model | greedy | t-wise coverage | testing efficiency, effectiveness, unavailable tool, evaluation | testing | SPLC18 |
Sebastian Oster, Florian Markert, Philipp Ritter | SPLC | 2010 | Automated Incremental Pairwise Testing of Software Product Lines | MoSo-PoLiTe | feature model, expert knowledge | greedy, semi-automatic selection | pair-wise coverage | sampling efficiency, testing efficiency, unavailable tool, evaluation | testing | SPLC18, SAT |
Myra B. Cohen, Matthew B. Dwyer, Jiangfan Shi | TSE | 2008 | Constructing Interaction Test Suites for Highly-Configurable Systems in the Presence of Constraints: A Greedy Approach | AETG-SAT | feature model | greedy | t-wise coverage | sampling efficiency, testing efficiency, unavailable tool, evaluation | testing | compares four variations of AETG-SAT, CCIT, JS20 |
Norbert Siegmund, Marko Rosenmüller, Martin Kuhlemann, Christian Kästner, Gunter Saake | APSEC | 2008 | Measuring Non-Functional Properties in Software Product Lines for Product Derivation | |||||||
Myra B. Cohen, Matthew B. Dwyer, Jiangfan Shi | ISSTA | 2007 | Interaction Testing of Highly-configurable Systems in the Presence of Constraints | subsumed by CDS:TSE08 | ||||||
Myra B. Cohen, Matthew B. Dwyer, Jiangfan Shi | MUTATION | 2007 | Exploiting Constraint Solving History to Construct Interaction Test Suites | subsumed by CDS:TSE08 |
The table above is the result of an expert survey. More details on the methodology can be found in the SPLC'18 paper. Nevertheless, there are a couple of details (not given in the paper) that we aim to share in the following.