惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
酷 壳 – CoolShell
酷 壳 – CoolShell
博客园 - 司徒正美
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
Last Week in AI
Last Week in AI
大猫的无限游戏
大猫的无限游戏
博客园 - Franky
奇客Solidot–传递最新科技情报
奇客Solidot–传递最新科技情报
爱范儿
爱范儿
The Cloudflare Blog
阮一峰的网络日志
阮一峰的网络日志
博客园 - 叶小钗
博客园_首页
有赞技术团队
有赞技术团队
WordPress大学
WordPress大学
宝玉的分享
宝玉的分享
V
V2EX
V
Visual Studio Blog
博客园 - 三生石上(FineUI控件)
S
SegmentFault 最新的问题
量子位
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
Apple Machine Learning Research
Apple Machine Learning Research
美团技术团队

cs.SE updates on arXiv.org

VLA Foundry: A Unified Framework for Training Vision-Language-Action Models Evaluating LLM-Generated Obfuscated XSS Payloads for Machine Learning-Based Detection Do Agents Dream of Root Shells? Partial-Credit Evaluation of LLM Agents in Capture the Flag Challenges Refute-or-Promote: An Adversarial Stage-Gated Multi-Agent Review Methodology for High-Precision LLM-Assisted Defect Discovery From Particles to Perils: SVGD-Based Hazardous Scenario Generation for Autonomous Driving Systems Testing Choose Your Own Adventure: Non-Linear AI-Assisted Programming with EvoGraph Human-Machine Co-Boosted Bug Report Identification with Mutualistic Neural Active Learning LLMSniffer: Detecting LLM-Generated Code via GraphCodeBERT and Supervised Contrastive Learning Neurosymbolic Repo-level Code Localization CodeMMR: Bridging Natural Language, Code, and Image for Unified Retrieval Symbolic Guardrails for Domain-Specific Agents: Stronger Safety and Security Guarantees Without Sacrificing Utility Verification Modulo Tested Library Contracts The Semi-Executable Stack: Agentic Software Engineering and the Expanding Scope of SE Scaling Test-Time Compute for Agentic Coding AI-Assisted Requirements Engineering: An Empirical Evaluation Relative to Expert Judgment From Procedural Skills to Strategy Genes: Towards Experience-Driven Test-Time Evolution Atropos: Improving Cost-Benefit Trade-off of LLM-based Agents under Self-Consistency with Early Termination and Model Hotswap Vibe-Coding: Feedback-Based Automated Verification with no Human Code Inspection, a Feasibility Study Benchmarks for Trajectory Safety Evaluation and Diagnosis in OpenClaw and Codex: ATBench-Claw and ATBench-Codex Bounded Autonomy for Enterprise AI: Typed Action Contracts and Consumer-Side Execution AIPC: Agent-Based Automation for AI Model Deployment with Qualcomm AI Runtime Analyzing Chain of Thought (CoT) Approaches in Control Flow Code Deobfuscation Tasks Asking What Matters: Reward-Driven Clarification for Software Engineering Tasks Prompt-Driven Code Summarization: A Systematic Literature Review LinuxArena: A Control Setting for AI Agents in Live Production Software Environments LLMs taking shortcuts in test generation: A study with SAP HANA and LevelDB Large Language Models to Enhance Business Process Modeling: Past, Present, and Future Trends CollabCoder: Plan-Code Co-Evolution via Collaborative Decision-Making for Efficient Code Generation Sentiment analysis for software engineering: How far can zero-shot learning (ZSL) go? Learning from Change: Predictive Models for Incident Prevention in a Regulated IT Environment
Testing Criteria for Mobile Apps Based on Callback Sequences
Danilo Dominguez Perez, Wei Le · 2019-11-21 · via cs.SE updates on arXiv.org

App quality has been shown to be the most important indicator of app adoption. To assure quality, developers mainly use testing to find bugs in app and apply structural and GUI test coverage criteria. However, mobile apps have more behaviors than the GUI actions, e.g. an app also handles events from sensors and executes long-running background tasks through Android API calls to Services and AsyncTasks. Our studies found that there are important app behaviors via callback interactions that should be covered in testing, as data sharing between callbacks is common and is the cause of many existing bugs. We design a family of test criteria based on callback sequences and use the Callback Control Flow Automata (CCFA) to measure the coverage for testing. Our experiments show that guiding by our criteria, testing can find more bugs and trigger bugs faster than the state-of-the-art tools.