Lattice-Based Semantics for Combinatorial Model Evolution

Combinatorial test design (CTD) is an effective test design technique, considered to be a testing best practice. CTD provides automatic test plan generation, but it requires a manual definition of the test space in the form of a combinatorial model. As the system under test evolves, e.g., due to iterative development processes and bug fixing, so does the test space, and thus, in the context of CTD, evolution translates into frequent manual model definition updates.

[1]  Orna Grumberg,et al.  3-Valued Abstraction: More Precision at Less Cost , 2006, LICS.

[2]  Bernhard Rumpe,et al.  ADDiff: semantic differencing for activity diagrams , 2011, ESEC/FSE '11.

[3]  Siddhartha R. Dalal,et al.  Model-based testing in practice , 1999, Proceedings of the 1999 International Conference on Software Engineering (IEEE Cat. No.99CB37002).

[4]  Joost-Pieter Katoen,et al.  Three-valued abstraction for probabilistic systems , 2012, J. Log. Algebraic Methods Program..

[5]  Myra B. Cohen,et al.  Testing across configurations: implications for combinatorial testing , 2006, SOEN.

[6]  Bernhard Rumpe,et al.  CDDiff: Semantic Differencing for Class Diagrams , 2011, ECOOP.

[7]  Brian A. Davey,et al.  An Introduction to Lattices and Order , 1989 .

[8]  Orna Grumberg,et al.  Abstract interpretation of reactive systems , 1997, TOPL.

[9]  Yu Lei,et al.  A Test Generation Strategy for Pairwise Testing , 2002, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[10]  Flemming Nielson,et al.  Principles of Program Analysis , 1999, Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

[11]  Rachel Tzoref-Brill,et al.  System Level Combinatorial Testing in Practice -- The Concurrent Maintenance Case Study , 2014, ICST 2014.

[12]  Rachel Tzoref,et al.  System Level Combinatorial Testing in Practice -- The Concurrent Maintenance Case Study , 2014, 2014 IEEE Seventh International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation.

[13]  Orna Grumberg,et al.  A framework for compositional verification of multi-valued systems via abstraction-refinement , 2009, Inf. Comput..

[14]  Myra B. Cohen,et al.  Combinatorial Interaction Regression Testing: A Study of Test Case Generation and Prioritization , 2007, 2007 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance.

[15]  Eitan Farchi,et al.  Using binary decision diagrams for combinatorial test design , 2011, ISSTA '11.

[16]  A. Jefferson Offutt,et al.  An evaluation of combination strategies for test case selection , 2006, Empirical Software Engineering.

[17]  R. L. Erickson,et al.  Improved quality of protocol testing through techniques of experimental design , 1994, Proceedings of ICC/SUPERCOMM'94 - 1994 International Conference on Communications.

[18]  Eran Yahav,et al.  Abstract semantic differencing via speculative correlation , 2014, OOPSLA.

[19]  Michael L. Fredman,et al.  The AETG System: An Approach to Testing Based on Combinatiorial Design , 1997, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[20]  Orna Grumberg,et al.  Don't Know in the µ-Calculus , 2005, VMCAI.

[21]  Patrick Cousot,et al.  Abstract interpretation: a unified lattice model for static analysis of programs by construction or approximation of fixpoints , 1977, POPL.

[22]  Jacek Czerwonka,et al.  Pairwise Testing in Real World , 2006 .

[23]  Jeff Yu Lei,et al.  Practical Combinatorial Testing: Beyond Pairwise , 2008, IT Professional.

[24]  D. Richard Kuhn,et al.  Software fault interactions and implications for software testing , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[25]  Hareton K. N. Leung,et al.  A survey of combinatorial testing , 2011, CSUR.