A Probabilistic Framework for Mutation Testing in Deep Neural Networks
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Context: Mutation Testing (MT) is an important tool in traditional Software Engineering (SE) white-box testing. It aims to artificially inject faults in a system to evaluate a test suite's capability to detect them, assuming that the test suite defects finding capability will then translate to real faults. If MT has long been used in SE, it is only recently that it started gaining the attention of the Deep Learning (DL) community, with researchers adapting it to improve the testability of DL models and improve the trustworthiness of DL systems. Objective: If several techniques have been proposed for MT, most of them neglected the stochasticity inherent to DL resulting from the training phase. Even the latest MT approaches in DL, which propose to tackle MT through a statistical approach, might give inconsistent results. Indeed, as their statistic is based on a fixed set of sampled training instances, it can lead to different results across instances set when results should be consistent for any instance. Methods: In this work, we propose a Probabilistic Mutation Testing (PMT) approach that alleviates the inconsistency problem and allows for a more consistent decision on whether a mutant is killed or not. Results: We show that PMT effectively allows a more consistent and informed decision on mutations through evaluation using three models and eight mutation operators used in previously proposed MT methods. We also analyze the trade-off between the approximation error and the cost of our method, showing that relatively small error can be achieved for a manageable cost. Conclusion: Our results showed the limitation of current MT practices in DNN and the need to rethink them. We believe PMT is the first step in that direction which effectively removes the lack of consistency across test executions of previous methods caused by the stochasticity of DNN training.
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 5 of its 44 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Aug 2022.
Builds on
5 of 44 references.
References · 5
- 2018DeepMutation: Mutation Testing of Deep Learning Systemscited by 66
- 2021How to Certify Machine Learning Based Safety-critical Systems? A Systematic Literature Reviewcited by 36
- 2018Using Machine Learning Safely in Automotive Software: An Assessment and Adaption of Software Process Requirements in ISO 26262cited by 13
- 2021What Are We Really Testing in Mutation Testing for Machine Learning? A Critical Reflectioncited by 7
- 2014Discussion of Big Bayes Stories and BayesBagcited by 6
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 2; 2024: 1.
3 papers.
- 2023Mutation Testing of Deep Reinforcement Learning Based on Real Faultscited by 4
- 2023Machine Learning Data Suitability and Performance Testing Using Fault Injection Testing Frameworkcited by 0
- 2024DeepCover: Advancing RNN Test Coverage and Online Error Prediction using State Machine Extractioncited by 0
- 2024DeepCover: Advancing RNN Test Coverage and Online Error Prediction using State Machine Extraction10 Feb 2024
- 2023Machine Learning Data Suitability and Performance Testing Using Fault Injection Testing Framework20 Sep 2023
- 2023Mutation Testing of Deep Reinforcement Learning Based on Real Faults13 Jan 2023