# Reading mutation results and strengthening tests

The mutation score is only useful if you know how to read it. This article walks through three real scenarios — one for each operator class — showing what a surviving mutant looks like in the output, what it tells you about your tests, and exactly what to change.

## The output table

Every `muttest::muttest()` run produces a table with one row per mutator/file pair:

Column | Meaning
--- | ---
K | Killed — mutants that caused at least one test to fail. Your tests caught the change.
S | Survived — mutants that passed all tests. Your tests did not notice the change.
E | Errors — mutants that produced a parse or execution error (neither killed nor survived).
T | Total — mutants generated for this mutator/file pair.
% | Score — `K / (K + S) × 100`.

A `✔` row means at least one mutant was killed. An `x` row means every mutant survived — your tests passed unchanged.

## What the score tells you

Score | Signal
--- | ---
0% | Your assertions do not constrain the outcome. Tests pass no matter what.
1–99% | Some cases are well-tested; others are not. The survivors point at the gaps.
100% | Every generated mutant was caught. Your tests are robust against these specific changes.

A 100% score does not mean there are no bugs — it means there are no untested bugs of the kinds the mutators probe. Start with the survivors; they are the actionable signal.

### Example: Mean Absolute Deviation — Direction-Insensitive Assertion

An assertion that checks a property of the result (sign, order, non-negativity) rather than the value will be blind to arithmetic operator swaps. Both the original and the mutant satisfy the same directional constraint, so the mutant survives. Replacing the directional assertion with an exact-value assertion kills it.

#### The function

    mean_absolute_deviation <- function(x, center) {
      mean(abs(x - center))
    }

`mean_absolute_deviation` computes the average distance from a center point: `mean(abs(x - center))`. The subtraction `x - center` is the step that arithmetic operator mutators target.

#### Weak test

    test_that("mean absolute deviation is non-negative", {
      expect_gte(mean_absolute_deviation(c(1, 3, 5), 3), 0)
    })

The test asserts that the result is non-negative (`expect_gte(..., 0)`). This checks a property of the output rather than its value.

Mutation testing output:

    ℹ Mutation Testing
      |   K |   S |   E |   T |   % | Mutator  | File
    x |   0 |   1 |   0 |   1 |   0 | - → +    | mad.R

    ── Results ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
    [ KILLED 0 | SURVIVED 1 | ERRORS 0 | TOTAL 1 | SCORE 0.0% ]

`- → +` survives. Changing `x - center` to `x + center` gives a different number, but `abs(x + center)` is also non-negative for all inputs. For `x = c(1,3,5)` and `center = 3`:

- Original: `abs(c(-2, 0, 2))` → mean = 4/3 ≈ 1.33
- Mutant: `abs(c(4, 6, 8))` → mean = 6

Both are ≥ 0. The assertion cannot distinguish them.

This pattern is common in LLM-generated tests that check what is obviously true about the result (it is positive, it is numeric) rather than what is specifically correct.

#### The fix

    test_that("mean absolute deviation equals average distance from center", {
      expect_equal(mean_absolute_deviation(c(1, 3, 5), 3), 4 / 3)
    })

Replace the directional assertion with `expect_equal` and a value computed by hand. Now the mutant returns 6, which is not 4/3, and the test fails.

After the fix:

    ℹ Mutation Testing
      |   K |   S |   E |   T |   % | Mutator  | File
    ✔ |   1 |   0 |   0 |   1 | 100 | - → +    | mad.R

    ── Results ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
    [ KILLED 1 | SURVIVED 0 | ERRORS 0 | TOTAL 1 | SCORE 100.0% ]

> When an arithmetic mutant survives, replace directional assertions (`expect_gt`, `expect_gte`) with exact-value assertions (`expect_equal`). Compute the expected value by hand and hard-code it.

### Example: Shipping Cost — Missing Boundary Value

A test suite that checks only “clearly above” and “clearly below” cases will let a boundary-shift mutant survive. The surviving mutant names the exact input your tests have never exercised. Adding a test at that precise boundary value kills it.

#### The function

    shipping_cost <- function(weight_kg) {
      if (weight_kg > 5) 15.00 else 5.00
    }

`shipping_cost` returns a flat rate based on whether the package is over or under 5 kg. The strict `>` operator means a 5 kg package pays the lower rate; `>=` would charge it the higher rate.

#### Weak test

    test_that("heavy packages cost more than light ones", {
      expect_gt(shipping_cost(10), shipping_cost(2))
    })

The test confirms that a heavy package costs more than a light one. It passes inputs of 10 and 2 kg — both clearly on opposite sides of the boundary — so it never exercises the value 5 itself.

Mutation testing output:

    ℹ Mutation Testing
      |   K |   S |   E |   T |   % | Mutator  | File
    ✔ |   1 |   0 |   0 |   1 | 100 | > → <    | shipping.R
    x |   1 |   1 |   0 |   2 |  50 | > → >=   | shipping.R

    ── Results ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
    [ KILLED 1 | SURVIVED 1 | ERRORS 0 | TOTAL 2 | SCORE 50.0% ]

`> → >=` survives. Changing `weight_kg > 5` to `weight_kg >= 5` only affects input `weight_kg = 5` exactly. For inputs 10 and 2, the function returns identical results under both operators, so the test cannot tell the operators apart.

In production, `>= 5` instead of `> 5` would route 5 kg shipments to the expensive tier and no test would catch the regression.

#### The fix

    test_that("heavy packages cost more than light ones", {
      expect_gt(shipping_cost(10), shipping_cost(2))
    })

    test_that("5kg falls into the lower-cost tier", {
      expect_equal(shipping_cost(5), 5.00)
    })

Add a test that passes the exact boundary value `5`. With `> 5`, the condition is `FALSE` and the function returns `5.00`. With `>= 5`, it is `TRUE` and returns `15.00`. This difference kills the mutant.

After the fix:

    ℹ Mutation Testing
      |   K |   S |   E |   T |   % | Mutator  | File
    ✔ |   1 |   0 |   0 |   1 | 100 | > → <    | shipping.R
    ✔ |   2 |   0 |   0 |   2 | 100 | > → >=   | shipping.R

    ── Results ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
    [ KILLED 2 | SURVIVED 0 | ERRORS 0 | TOTAL 2 | SCORE 100.0% ]

> When a comparison mutant survives, find the boundary value implied by the operator and add a test that passes exactly that value.

## Summary: three patterns, three fixes

Surviving mutant | Root cause | Fix
--- | --- | ---
Comparison (`>=` → `>`) | Boundary value never tested | Add a test that passes the exact threshold value
Arithmetic (`-` → `+`) | Assertion checks direction, not value | Replace `expect_gt/gte` with `expect_equal` and a computed expected value
Logical (`\|\|` → `&&`) | Symmetric inputs (both true or both false) | Add a test with asymmetric inputs (one true, one false)

The feedback loop is:

1. Run muttest
2. Find survivors
3. Strengthen tests
4. Repeat

Start with one file and one mutator preset. Look at what survives. The survivor names the exact mutant that your tests cannot distinguish — that is your actionable signal.