Abstract
In our previous paper [1], a new model of a Labeled Transition System (LTS)-type implementation was proposed. In ordinary LTSs, transitions are labeled by actions; therefore, they can be called LTSs of actions. The new model is an LTS of observations; in this model, observations and test actions (buttons) are used instead of actions. This model generalizes many testing semantics that are based on the LTS of actions but use additional observations (refusals, ready sets, etc.). Moreover, systems with priority, which are not described by the LTS of actions, are simulated uniformly. In the present paper, we develop this approach by focusing on the composition of systems. The point is that, on observation traces, one cannot define a composition with respect to which a composition of LTSs would possess the property of additivity: the set of traces of a composition of LTSs coincides with the set of all pairwise compositions of traces of LTS operands. This is explained by the fact that an observation in a composition state is not calculated based on observations in states-operands. In this paper, we propose an approach that eliminates this drawback. To this end, we label the transitions of LTSs by symbols (events) that, on the one hand, can be composed to guarantee the property of additivity, and, on the other hand, can be used to generate observations under testing: a transition by an event gives rise to an observation related to this event. This model is called an LTS of events. In this paper, we define (1) a transformation of an LTS of events into an LTS of observations to conform with the principles of our previous paper [1]; (2) a composition of LTSs of events; (3) a composition of specifications that preserves conformance: a composition of conformal implementations is conformal to a composition of specifications; and (4) a uniform simulation of LTSs of actions in terms of the LTSs of events, which allows one to consider an implementation in any interaction semantics admissible for LTSs of actions. In this case, a composition of LTSs of events obtained as a result of simulation of the original LTSs of actions is equivalent to the LTS of events obtained as a result of simulation of the composition of these LTSs of actions.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bourdonov, I.B. and Kossatchev, A.S., Formalization of a test experiment — II, Program. Comput. Software, 2013, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 163–181.
Bourdonov, I.B., Kossatchev, A.S., and Kuliamin, V.V., Formalization of test experiments, Program. Comput. Software, 2007, vol. 33, no. 5, pp. 239–260.
Bourdonov, I.B., Kossatchev, A.S., and Kuliamin, V.V., Teoriya sootvetstviya dlya sistem s blokirovkami i razrusheniem (Conformance Theory for Systems with Blockings and Destruction), Moscow: Nauka, 2008.
Bourdonov, I.B. and Kossatchev, A.S., Systems with priorities: Conformance, testing, and composition, Tr. Inst. Syst. Program., 2008, no. 14.1.
Bourdonov, I.B. and Kossatchev, A.S., Systems with priorities: Conformance, testing, and composition, Program. Comput. Software, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 198–211].
Bourdonov, I.B., Teoriya konformnosti (Funktsional’noe testirovanie programmnykh system na osnove formal’nykh modelei) (Conformance Theory: Functional Testing of Software Systems on the Basis of Formal Models), Saarbrucken: LAP LAMBERT Academic Publ., 2011.
van Glabbeek, R.J., The linear time-branching time spectrum, Proc. of CONCUR’90, Baeten, J.C.M. and Klop, J.W., Eds., Lect. Notes Comput. Sci., Springer, 1990, vol. 458, pp. 278–297.
van Glabbeek, R.J., The linear time-branching time spectrum II: The semantics of sequential processes with silent moves, Proc. Of CONCUR’93 (Hildesheim, Germany, 1993), Best, E., Ed., Lect. Notes Comput. Sci., Springer, 1993, vol. 715, pp. 66–81.
Milner, R., Modal characterization of observable machine behavior, Proceedings CAAP 81, Astesiano, G. and Bohm, C., Eds., Lect. Notes Comput. Sci., Springer, 1981, vol. 112, pp. 25–34.
Hoare, C.A.R., Communicating sequential processes, in On the Construction of Programs-An Advanced Course, McKeag, R.M. and Macnaghten, A.M., Eds., Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1980, pp. 229–254.
Tretmans, J., Conformance testing with labelled transition systems: Implementation relations and test generation, Comput. Networks ISDN Syst., 1996, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 49–79.
Tretmans, J., Test generation with inputs, outputs and repetitive quiescence, in Software-Concepts and Tools, 1996, vol. 17,issue 3.
van der Bijl, M., Rensink, A., and Tretmans, J., Compositional testing with ioco, Formal Approaches to Software Testing, Third International Workshop, FATES 2003, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, October 6th, 2003, Petrenko, A. and Ulrich, A., Eds., Lect. Notes Comput. Sci., Springer, 1981, vol. 2931, pp. 86–100.
van der Bijl, M., Rensink, A., and Tretmans, J., Component Based Testing with ioco, CTIT Technical Report TR-CTIT-03-34, University of Twente, 2003.
Jard, C., Jeron, T., Tanguy, L., and Viho, C., Remote testing can be as powerful as local testing, Formal Methods for Protocol Engineering and Distributed Systems, FORTE XII/PSTV XIX’ 99, Beijing, China, Wu, J., Chanson, S., and Gao, Q., Eds., October 1999, pp. 25–40.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Original Russian Text © I.B. Bourdonov, A.S. Kossatchev, 2013, published in Programmirovanie, 2013, Vol. 39, No. 6.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bourdonov, I.B., Kossatchev, A.S. Agreement between conformance and composition. Program Comput Soft 39, 269–278 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1134/S0361768813060029
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S0361768813060029