Fault Model-Driven Test Derivation from Finite State Models: Annotated Bibliography

  • Alexandre Petrenko
Chapter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2067)

Abstract

The annotated bibliography highlights work in the area of algorithmic test generation from formal specifications with guaranteed fault coverage, i.e., fault model-driven test derivation. A fault model is understood as a triple, comprising a finite state specification, conformance relation and fault domain that is the set of possible implementations. The fault model can be specialized to Input/Output FSM, Labeled Transition System, or Input/Output Automaton and to a number of conformance relations such as FSM equivalence, reduction or quasiequivalence, trace inclusion or trace equivalence and others. The fault domain usually reflects test assumptions, as an example, it can be the universe of all possible I/O FSMs with a given number of states, a classical fault domain in FSM-based testing. A test suite is complete with respect to a given fault model when each implementation from the fault domain passes it if and only if the postulated conformance relation holds between the implementation and its specification. A complete test suite is said to provide fault coverage guarantee for a given fault model.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alur, R., Courcoubetis, C., and Yannakakis, M.: Distinguishing Tests for Nondeterministic and Probabilistic Machines. In: Proceedings of the 27th ACM Symposiumon Theory of Computing (1995) 363–372Google Scholar
  2. Bhattacharyya, A.: Checking Experiments in Sequential Machines. John Wiley & Sons (1989)Google Scholar
  3. Bochmann, G. v., Das, A., Dssouli, R., Dubuc, M., Ghedamsi, A., and Luo, G.: Fault Models in Testing. In: Proceedings of IFIP TC6 Fourth International Workshop on Protocol Test Systems. North-Holland (1991) 17–30Google Scholar
  4. Bochmann, G. v. and Petrenko, A.: Protocol Testing: Review of Methods and Relevance for Software Testing. In: Proceedings of ACM International Symposiumon Software Testing and Analysis. Seattle USA (1994) 109–123Google Scholar
  5. Boroday, S. Yu.: Distinguishing tests for nondeterministic finite state machines. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop on Testing of Communicating Systems (IWTCS’98). Russia (1998) 101–107Google Scholar
  6. Boroday, S. Yu.: Simple Fault Checking For Automata Generated By A Fault Function. Cybernetics and SystemAnalysis. Plenum Publishing New York. Vol. 31, No. 6. (1995) 835–841Google Scholar
  7. Chow, T. S.: Testing Software Design Modeled by Finite-State Machines. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. Vol. SE-4, No. 3. (1978) 178–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Friedman, A. D., and Menon, P. R.: Fault Detection in Digital Circuits. Prentice-Hall (1971) Chapter 3 explains checking experiments on minimal completely defined deterministic I/O FSMs.Google Scholar
  9. Fujiwara, S., Bochmann, G. v., Khendek, F., Amalou, M., and Ghedamsi, A.: Test Selection Based on Finite State Models. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. Vol. SE-17, No.6. (1991) 591–603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gill, A.: Introduction to the theory of finite-state machines. Mc Graw-Hill. New York (1962)Google Scholar
  11. Gonenc, G.: A Method for the Design of Fault Detection Experiments. IEEE Transactions on Computers. Vol. C-19. June (1970) 551–558CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Grunsky, I. S., and Petrenko, A.: Design of Checking Experiments with Automata Describing Protocols. Automatic Control and Computer Sciences. Allerton Press Inc. USA. No. 4 (1988)Google Scholar
  13. Grunsky, I. S.: Testing of Automata: from Experiments to Representations by Means of Fragments. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop on Testing of Communicating Systems (IWTCS’98). Russia (1998) 3–14.Google Scholar
  14. Hennie, F. C.: Fault Detecting Experiments for Sequential Circuits. In: Proceedings of the IEEE 5th Annual Symposium on Switching Circuits Theory and Logical Design. Princeton (1964) 95–110Google Scholar
  15. Holzmann, G. J.: Design and Validation of Computer Protocols. Prentice Hall (1991)Google Scholar
  16. Hsieh, E. P.: Checking Experiments for Sequential Machines. IEEE Transactions on Computers. Vol. C-20, No. 10. (1971) 1152–1166.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. Kohavi, Z.: Switching and Finite Automata Theory. McGraw-Hill Computer Science Series. New York (1970)Google Scholar
  18. Koufareva, I., Petrenko, A., and Yevtushenko, N.: Test Generation Driven by User-defined Fault models. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Workshop on Testing of Communicating Systems (IWTCS’99). Hungary (1999) 215–233Google Scholar
  19. Lee, D., and Yannakakis, M.: Testing Finite-State Machines: State Identification and Verification. IEEE Transactions of Computers. Vol. 43, No. 3 (1994) 306–320CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. Lee, D., and Yannakakis, M.: Principles and Methods of Testing Finite-State Machines-A survey. Proceedings of the IEEE. Vol. 84, No. 8. (1996) 1090–1123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lukyanov, B. D.: Distinguishing and Control Experiments with Nondeterministic Automata. Cybernetics and SystemAnalysis. PlenumPublishing. New York. Vol. 31, No 5. (1995) 691–696Google Scholar
  22. Luo, G., Bochmann, G. v., and Petrenko, A.: Test Selection based on Communicating Nondeterministic Finite State Machines using a Generalized Wp-Method. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. Vol. SE-20, No. 2. (1994) 149–162Google Scholar
  23. Luo, G., Petrenko, A., and Bochmann, G. v.: Selecting Test Sequences for Partially Specified Nondeterministic Finite State Machines. In: Proceedings of the IFIP Seventh International Workshop on Protocol Test Systems. Japan (1994) 95–110Google Scholar
  24. Moore, E. F.: Gedanken-Experiments on Sequential Machines. In: Automata Studies. Princeton University Press. Princeton New Jersey (1956) 129–153Google Scholar
  25. Naito, S., and Tsunoyama, M.: Fault Detection for Sequential Machines by Transition-Tours. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Fault Tolerant Computer Systems (1981) 238–243Google Scholar
  26. Petrenko, A.: Checking Experiments with Protocol Machines. In: Proceedings of IFIP Fourth International Workshop on Protocol Test Systems. North-Holland (1991) 83–94Google Scholar
  27. Petrenko, A., and Yevtushenko, N.: Test Suite Generation for a FSM with a Given Type of Implementation Errors. In: Proceedings of IFIP 12th International Symposium on Protocol Specification, Testing, and Verification. USA (1992) 229–243Google Scholar
  28. Petrenko, A., Bochmann, G. v., and Dssouli, R.: Conformance Relation and Test Derivation. In: Proceedings of IFIP Fifth International Workshop on Protocol Test Systems, 1993. North-Holland (1994) 157–178Google Scholar
  29. Petrenko, A., Yevtushenko, N., Lebedev, A., and Das, A.: Nondeterministic State Machines in Protocol Conformance Testing. In: Proceedings of IFIP Fifth International Workshop on Protocol Test Systems, 1993. North-Holland (1994) 363–378Google Scholar
  30. Petrenko, A., Yevtushenko, N., Bochmann, G. v., and Dssouli, R.: Testing in Context: Framework and Test Derivation. Computer Communications (special issue on protocol engineering). 19 (1996) 1236–1249Google Scholar
  31. Petrenko, A., Yevtushenko, N., and Bochmann, G. v.: Fault Models for Testing in Context. In: Proceedings of IFIP Joint International Conference on Formal Description Techniques for Distributed Systems and Communication Protocols, and Protocol Specification, Testing, and Verification. Germany (1996) 163–178Google Scholar
  32. Petrenko, A., Yevtushenko, N., and Bochmann, G. v.: Testing Deterministic Implementations from Nondeterministic FSM Specifications. In: Proceedings of the 9th InternationalWorkshop on Testing of Communicating Systems. Germany (1996) 125–140Google Scholar
  33. Petrenko, A., Bochmann, G. v., and Yao, M.: On Fault Coverage of Tests for Finite State Specifications. Computer Networks and ISDN Systems (special issue on protocol testing). 29, December (1996) 81–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Petrenko, A., and Yevtushenko, N.: Fault Detection in Embedded Components. In: Proceedings of 10th International Workshop on Testing of Communicating Systems. Korea (1997) 272–287Google Scholar
  35. Poage, J. F., and McCluskey, Jr., E. J.: Derivation of Optimal Test Sequences for Sequential Machines. In: Proceedings of the IEEE 5th Symposium on Switching Circuits Theory and Logical Design (1964) 121–132Google Scholar
  36. Rezaki, A., and Ural H.: Construction of Checking Sequences Based on Characterization Sets. Computer Communications. Vol. 18, No. 12 (1995) 911–920CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sidhu, D. P., and Leung, T. K.: Formal Methods for Protocol Testing: A Detailed Study. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. Vol. SE-15, No. 4. (1989) 413–426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Starke, P. H.: Abstract Automata. North-Holland/American Elsevier. (1972)Google Scholar
  39. Tan, Q. M., Petrenko, A., and Bochmann, G. v.: Modeling Basic LOTOS by FSMs for Conformance Testing. In: Proceedings of the 15th International IFIP Symposium on Protocol Specification, Testing and Verification. Poland (1995) 123–138Google Scholar
  40. Tan, Q. M., Petrenko, A., and Bochmann, G. v.: A Framework for Conformance Testing of Systems Communicating through Rendezvous. In: Proceedings of the 26th IEEE International Symposium on Fault-Tolerant Computing. Japan (1996) 230–238Google Scholar
  41. Tan, Q. M., Petrenko, A., and Bochmann, G. v.: Checking Experiments with Labeled Transition Systems for Trace Equivalence. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Workshop on Testing of Communicating Systems. Korea (1997) 167–182Google Scholar
  42. Tan, Q. M., Petrenko, A.: Test Generation for Specifications Modeled by Input/ Output Automata. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop on Testing of Communicating Systems. Russia (1998) 83–99Google Scholar
  43. Trakhtenbrot, B. A., Barzdin, Y. M.: Finite Automata, Behaviour and Synthesis. North-Holland (1973)Google Scholar
  44. Ural, H.: Formal Methods for Test Sequence Generation. Computer Communications. Vol. 15, No. 5. (1992) 311–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Vasilevskii, M. P.: Failure Diagnosis of Automata. Cybernetics. Plenum Publishing Corporation. New York No. 4 (1973) 653–665Google Scholar
  46. Yannakakis, M., and Lee, D.: Testing Finite-State Machines: Fault Detection. Journal of Computer and System Sciences. 50 (1995) 209–227MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  47. Yao, M., Petrenko, A., and Bochmann, G. v.: Conformance Testing of Protocol Machines without Reset. In: Proceedings of the 13th IFIP Symposium on Protocol Specification, Testing and Verification. Belgium(1993) 241–253Google Scholar
  48. Yevtushenko, N., and Petrenko, A.: Synthesis of Test Experiments in Some Classes of Automata. Automatic Control and Computer Sciences. Allerton Press Inc. USA No. 4 (1990)Google Scholar
  49. Yevtushenko, N., and Petrenko, A.: Method of Constructing a Test Experiment for an Arbitrary Deterministic Automaton. Automatic Control and Computer Sciences. Allerton Press Inc. USA. No. 5 (1990)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexandre Petrenko
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre de Recherche Informatique de Montreal (CRIM)MontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations