Test Adequacy Using Program Mutation

Question 1

T/F A non-equivalent and live mutant offers the tester an opportunity to generate a new test case and hence enhance T

Answer 1

T

Question 2

T/F Mutation is not a significantly different way of assessing test adequacy

Answer 2

F, it is

Question 3

T/F Second-order mutants are the ones generally used

in practice

Answer 3

F, first-order

Question 4

T/F Two programs may be equivalent under strong mutation testing but distinguishable under weak mutation testing

Answer 4

T

Question 5

T/F Testing under mutation often leads to the discovery of subtle flaws.

Answer 5

T

Question 6

T/F As with any test enhancement technique, there is no guarantee that tests derived to distinguish live mutants will reveal a yet undiscovered error in P.

Answer 6

T

Question 7

T/F Empirical studies have found mutation testing to be the least powerful of all formal test enhancement techniques.

Answer 7

F, most powerful

Question 8

T/F Sometimes there exists a mutant P’ of program P such that any test t that distinguishes P’ from P also causes P to fail

Answer 8

T

Question 9

T/F The problem of deciding whether or not a mutant is equivalent to its parent program is undecidable

Answer 9

T

Question 10

T/F Identifying equivalent mutants is generally a manual and often time-consuming – as well as frustrating – process

Answer 10

T

Question 11

T/F Any “coverage” based technique, including mutation, will not be able to detect errors due to a missing path

Answer 11

F

Question 12

T/F Each mutation operator is assigned a unique

name

Answer 12

T