The article "Software Unit Test Coverage and Adequacy" by Hong Zhu, Patrick A. V. Hall, and John H. R. May reviews the research on software test criteria over the past two decades. The authors emphasize the importance of objective measurement of test quality and the role of test adequacy criteria in software dynamic testing. They define test adequacy criteria as predicates that define what constitutes a thorough test, ensuring no errors in the tested program. The article discusses two main aspects of test adequacy criteria: stopping rules and measurements of test quality. Stopping rules determine when testing can be stopped, while measurements provide a quantitative assessment of test quality. The authors also explore the different types of test adequacy criteria, including specification-based, program-based, combined specification and program-based, interface-based, and structural, fault-based, and error-based criteria. They review various control-flow and data-flow adequacy criteria, such as statement coverage, branch coverage, path coverage, and multiple condition coverage, and discuss their limitations and extensions. The article concludes by discussing the rationale behind different criteria and methods for comparing and assessing them.The article "Software Unit Test Coverage and Adequacy" by Hong Zhu, Patrick A. V. Hall, and John H. R. May reviews the research on software test criteria over the past two decades. The authors emphasize the importance of objective measurement of test quality and the role of test adequacy criteria in software dynamic testing. They define test adequacy criteria as predicates that define what constitutes a thorough test, ensuring no errors in the tested program. The article discusses two main aspects of test adequacy criteria: stopping rules and measurements of test quality. Stopping rules determine when testing can be stopped, while measurements provide a quantitative assessment of test quality. The authors also explore the different types of test adequacy criteria, including specification-based, program-based, combined specification and program-based, interface-based, and structural, fault-based, and error-based criteria. They review various control-flow and data-flow adequacy criteria, such as statement coverage, branch coverage, path coverage, and multiple condition coverage, and discuss their limitations and extensions. The article concludes by discussing the rationale behind different criteria and methods for comparing and assessing them.