Comparison and analysis between automatic exploration tools for Android applications
The number of different tools to explore Android applications has been increasing. Every tool has a different exploration strategy and clam to offer different benefits than others. The huge amount of tools and the lack of impartial information about them makes that developers and researchers have no...
- Autores:
-
Osorio Riaño, Michael Stiven
- Tipo de recurso:
- Trabajo de grado de pregrado
- Fecha de publicación:
- 2020
- Institución:
- Universidad de los Andes
- Repositorio:
- Séneca: repositorio Uniandes
- Idioma:
- eng
- OAI Identifier:
- oai:repositorio.uniandes.edu.co:1992/48955
- Acceso en línea:
- http://hdl.handle.net/1992/48955
- Palabra clave:
- Aplicaciones móviles
Android (Recurso electrónico)
Ingeniería
- Rights
- openAccess
- License
- http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
Summary: | The number of different tools to explore Android applications has been increasing. Every tool has a different exploration strategy and clam to offer different benefits than others. The huge amount of tools and the lack of impartial information about them makes that developers and researchers have no basis and data to face a decision-making situation or data to compare their own new tools. Others studies have made different comparisons between exploration tools in the past, but most of those tools are no longer being used in the industry or in the academy, that is why there is a need of studies providing clear and unbiased information about the newest tools that allows the developers and researchers to acquire a better perspective of the modern exploration tools. That is the reason why in this study, four of the most used tools for automatic exploration of Android applications are analysed and compared according their progressive and achieved method coverage, and the max number of errors found in one exploration. Besides, a reproducible workflow is proposed for future studies of the same type as well as two tools for allowing faster and easier comparison are described |
---|