Test Suite Quality for Model Transformation Chains

For testing model transformations or model transformation chains, a software engineer usually designs a test suite consisting of test cases where each test case consists of one or several models. In order to ensure a high quality of such a test suite, coverage achieved by the test cases with regards to the system under test must be systematically measured. Using coverage analysis and the resulting coverage information, missing test cases and redundant test cases can be identified and thereby the quality of the test suite can be improved. As test cases consist of models, a coverage analysis approach must measure how complete models cover the domains of the transformations in the chain and to what degree of completeness transformations are covered when executing the test suite. In this paper, we present a coverage analysis approach for measuring test suite quality for model transformation chains. Our approach combines different coverage criteria and yields detailed coverage information that can be used to identify missing and redundant test cases.

[1]  Yves Le Traon,et al.  Qualifying input test data for model transformations , 2009, Software & Systems Modeling.

[2]  Gregg Rothermel,et al.  An empirical study of the effects of minimization on the fault detection capabilities of test suites , 1998, Proceedings. International Conference on Software Maintenance (Cat. No. 98CB36272).

[3]  Juan de Lara,et al.  A Visual Specification Language for Model-to-Model Transformations , 2010, 2010 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing.

[4]  Jean Bézivin,et al.  ATL: A model transformation tool , 2008, Sci. Comput. Program..

[5]  A. Jefferson Offutt,et al.  Introduction to Software Testing , 2008 .

[6]  Mats P. E. Heimdahl,et al.  Test-suite reduction for model based tests: effects on test quality and implications for testing , 2004 .

[7]  MeyerBertrand,et al.  Design by Contract , 1997 .

[8]  Chen Zhang,et al.  A Dynamic Test Cluster Sampling Strategy by Leveraging Execution Spectra Information , 2010, 2010 Third International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation.

[9]  Yolande Berbers,et al.  Constructing and Visualizing Transformation Chains , 2008, ECMDA-FA.

[10]  James F. Power,et al.  White-Box Coverage Criteria for Model Transformations , 2009 .

[11]  Arend Rensink.  Model Driven Architecture - Foundations and Applications, 5th European Conference, ECMDA-FA 2009, Enschede, The Netherlands, June 23-26, 2009. Proceedings , 2009, ECMDA-FA.

[12]  Yves Le Traon,et al.  Model Transformation Testing Challenges , 2006 .

[13]  Y. Fazlalizadeh,et al.  A new algorithm to Test Suite Reduction based on cluster analysis , 2009, 2009 2nd IEEE International Conference on Computer Science and Information Technology.

[14]  Krzysztof Czarnecki,et al.  Feature-based survey of model transformation approaches , 2006, IBM Syst. J..

[15]  Robert B. France,et al.  Test adequacy criteria for UML design models , 2003, Softw. Test. Verification Reliab..

[16]  Laurence Duchien,et al.  OCL for the Specification of Model Transformation Contracts , 2004 .

[17]  Gregor Engels,et al.  Detecting and Resolving Process Model Differences in the Absence of a Change Log , 2008, BPM.

[18]  Bertrand Meyer,et al.  Applying 'design by contract' , 1992, Computer.

[19]  Lee J. White,et al.  Multivariate visualization in observation-based testing , 2000, Proceedings of the 2000 International Conference on Software Engineering. ICSE 2000 the New Millennium.

[20]  Dániel Varró,et al.  VIATRA - visual automated transformations for formal verification and validation of UML models , 2002, Proceedings 17th IEEE International Conference on Automated Software Engineering,.

[21]  Mary Lou Soffa,et al.  A methodology for controlling the size of a test suite , 1993, TSEM.