A Symbolic Framework for Model-Based Testing

The starting point for Model-Based Testing is an implementation relation that formally defines when a formal model representing the System Under Test conforms to a formal model constituting its specification. An implementation relation for the formalism of Labelled Transition Systems is ioco. For ioco several test generation algorithms and test tools have been built. In this paper we define a framework for the symbolic implementation relation sioco which lifts ioco to Symbolic Transition Systems. These are transition systems with an explicit notion of data and data-dependent control flow. The introduction of symbolism avoids the state-space explosion during test generation, and it preserves the information present in data definitions and constraints for use during the test selection process. We show the soundness and completeness of the symbolic notions w.r.t. their underlying Labelled Transition Systems' counterparts.

[1]  Manfred Broy,et al.  Part III. Model-Based Test Case Generation , 2004, Model-Based Testing of Reactive Systems.

[2]  Thierry Jéron,et al.  TGV : theory , principles and algorithms A tool for the automatic synthesis of conformance test cases for non-deterministic reactive systems , 2004 .

[3]  Hartmut Ehrig,et al.  Mathematisch-strukturelle Grundlagen der Informatik , 1999, Mathematisch-strukturelle Grundlagen der Informatik.

[4]  David Lee,et al.  Principles and methods of testing finite state machines-a survey , 1996, Proc. IEEE.

[5]  Manfred Broy,et al.  Model-Based Testing of Reactive Systems, Advanced Lectures , 2005 .

[6]  Jan Tretmans,et al.  Test Generation with Inputs, Outputs and Repetitive Quiescence , 1996, Softw. Concepts Tools.

[7]  Manfred Broy,et al.  Model-Based Testing of Reactive Systems: Advanced Lectures (Lecture Notes in Computer Science) , 2005 .

[8]  Katalin Tarnay,et al.  Testing of Communicating Systems , 1999, IFIP — The International Federation for Information Processing.

[9]  Christophe Gaston,et al.  Symbolic Execution Techniques for Test Purpose Definition , 2006, TestCom.

[10]  Nicolae Goga,et al.  Formal Test Automation: A Simple Experiment , 1999, IWTCS.

[11]  Manfred Broy,et al.  Model-Based Testing of Reactive Systems, Advanced Lectures [The volume is the outcome of a research seminar that was held in Schloss Dagstuhl in January 2004] , 2005, Model-Based Testing of Reactive Systems.

[12]  Bertrand Jeannet,et al.  Symbolic Test Selection Based on Approximate Analysis , 2005, TACAS.

[13]  Hartmut Ehrig,et al.  Mathematisch-strukturelle Grundlagen der Informatik, 2. Auflage , 2001, Mathematisch-strukturelle Grundlagen der Informatik, 2. Auflage.

[14]  Rajeev Alur,et al.  A Temporal Logic of Nested Calls and Returns , 2004, TACAS.

[15]  Raymond T. Yeh,et al.  Proceedings of the international conference on Reliable software , 1975 .

[16]  G. G. Stokes.  "J." , 1890, The New Yale Book of Quotations.

[17]  Thierry Jéron,et al.  An Approach to Symbolic Test Generation , 2000, IFM.

[18]  Jan Tretmans,et al.  Test Generation Based on Symbolic Specifications , 2004, FATES.

[19]  Rick Reed,et al.  SDL 2001: Meeting UML , 2001, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[20]  Brian Nielsen,et al.  Formal Approaches to Software Testing, 4th International Workshop, FATES 2004, Linz, Austria, September 21, 2004, Revised Selected Papers , 2005, FATES.

[21]  Tommaso Bolognesi,et al.  Tableau methods to describe strong bisimilarity on LOTOS processes involving pure interleaving and enabling , 1994, FORTE.

[22]  Nicolae Goga,et al.  Comparing TorX, Autolink, TGV and UIO Test Algorithms , 2001, SDL Forum.

[23]  Achim D. Brucker,et al.  Symbolic Test Case Generation for Primitive Recursive Functions , 2004, FATES.

[24]  David Harel,et al.  Statecharts: A Visual Formalism for Complex Systems , 1987, Sci. Comput. Program..

[25]  James C. King,et al.  A new approach to program testing , 1974, Programming Methodology.