The all-du-paths data flow testing criterion was designed to be more demanding than the all-uses criterion, which itself was designed to be more demanding than the all-edges criterion. However, formal comparison metrics developed within the testing community have failed to validate these relationships, without requiring restrictive or undecidable assumptions regarding the universe of programs to which the criteria apply. We show that the formal relationships among these criteria can be made consistent with their intended relative strengths, without making restrictive or undecidable assumptions.
['Allen S. Parrish', 'Stuart H. Zweben']
On the relationships among the all-uses, all-DU-paths, and all-edges testing criteria