Advertisement

Testing deterministic implementations from nondeterministic FSM specifications

  • A. Petrenko
  • N. Yevtushenko
  • G. v. Bochmann
Part of the IFIP — The International Federation for Information Processing book series (IFIPAICT)

Abstract

In this paper, conformance testing of protocols specified as nondeterministic finite state machines is considered. Protocol implementations are assumed to be deterministic. In this testing scenario, the conformance relation becomes a preorder, so-called reduction relation between FSMs. The reduction relation requires that an implementation machine produces a (sub)set of output sequences that can be produced by its specification machine in response to every input sequence. A method for deriving tests with respect to the reduction relation with full fault coverage for deterministic implementations is proposed based on certain properties of the product of specification and implementation machines.

Keywords

Conformance testing test derivation fault detection I/O nondeterministic FSMs equivalence and reduction relations 

References

  1. Bochmann, v.G. and Petrenko, A. (1994) Protocol testing: review of methods and relevance for software testing. ISSTA’94 ACM International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis. pp. 109–124Google Scholar
  2. Chow, T. S. (1978) Testing software design modeled by finite-state machines. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. SE-4, No 3, pp. 178–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Damiani, M. (1994) Nondeterministic finite-state machines and sequential don’t cares. Proceedings of the European Conference on Design Test, pp. 192–198.Google Scholar
  4. Fujiwara, S., Bochmann, v.G., Khendek, F., Amalou, M., and Ghedamsi, A. (1991) Test selection based on finite state models. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. SE-17, No. 6, pp. 591–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gill, A. (1962) Introduction to the theory of finite-state machines, NY, McGraw-Hill, 270 p.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. Grasselli, A. and Luccio, F. (1965) A method for minimizing the number of internal states in incompletely specified sequential networks. IEEE Transactions on Electronic Computers, No. 6, pp. 350–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hennie, F. C. (1964) Fault detecting experiments for sequential circuits. Proceedings of the IEEE 5th Ann. Symp. on Switching Circuits Theory and Logical Design, pp. 95–110.Google Scholar
  8. Hoperoft, J.E., and Ullman, J.D. (1979) Introduction to automata theory. languages and computation. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc., 418 p.Google Scholar
  9. Kohavi, Z. (1978) Switching and finite automata theory, N.Y., McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  10. Luo, G., Petrenko, A., and Bochmann, v.G. (1994) Selecting test sequences for partially-specified nondeterministic finite state machines. Protocol Test Systems VII (the Proceedings of IFIP WG 6.1 International Workshop on Protocol Test Systems 1994), Chapman Hall, 1995, pp. 95–110.Google Scholar
  11. Moore, E. F. (1956) Gedanken-experiments on sequential machines, Automata Studies, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, pp. 129–153.Google Scholar
  12. Petrenko, A. (1991) Checking experiments with protocol machines. IFIP Transactions, Protocol Test Systems, IV (the Proceedings of IFIP TC6 Fourth International Workshop on Protocol Test Systems, 1991), 1992, North-Holland, pp. 83–94.Google Scholar
  13. Petrenko, A. and Yevtushenko, N. (1992) Test suite generation for a fsm with a given type of implementation errors. IFIP Transactions Protocol Specification, Testing, and Verification XII (the Proceedings of IFIP TC6 12th International Symposium on Protocol Specification, Testing, and Verification 1992), pp. 229–243.Google Scholar
  14. Petrenko, A., Bochmann, v.G., and Dssouli, R. (1993) Conformance relations and test derivation. IFIP Transactions Protocol Test Systems VI (the Proceedings of IFIP TC6 Fifth International Workshop on Protocol Test Systems,1993) North-Holland, 1994, pp. 157–178.Google Scholar
  15. Petrenko, A., Yevtushenko, N., Lebedev, A., and Das, A. (1993) Nondeterministic state machines in protocol conformance testing. IFIP Transactions Protocol Test Systems VI (the Proceedings of IFIP TC6 Fifth International Workshop on Protocol Test Systems 1993), North-Holland, 1994, pp. 363–378.Google Scholar
  16. Petrenko, A., Yevtushenko, N., and Dssouli, R. (1994) Testing strategies for communicating fsms. Protocol Test Systems VII (the Proceedings of IFIP WG 6.1 International Workshop on Protocol Test Systems, 1994) Chapman Hall, 1995, pp. 193–208.Google Scholar
  17. Petrenko, A., Yevtushenko, N., and Bochmann, v.G. (1994) Experiments on nondeterministic systems for the reduction relation. Technical Report 932, Université de Montréal, 23 p.Google Scholar
  18. Petrenko, A. and Bochmann, v.G. (1996) On fault coverage of tests for finite state specifications. To appear in a special issue on Protocol Testing of Computer Networks and ISDN Systems.Google Scholar
  19. Petrenko, A., Yevtushenko, N., Bochmann, v.G., and Dssouli, R. (1996) Testing in context: framework and test derivation. Technical Report 1011, Université de Montréal, To appear in a special issue on Protocol Engineering of Computer Communications Journal.Google Scholar
  20. Starke, P. H. (1972) Abstract automata. North-Holland/American Elsevier, 419p.Google Scholar
  21. Sidhu, D. P. and Leung, T. K. (1989) Formal methods for protocol testing: a detailed study. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol SE-15, No 4, pp. 413–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Vasilevski, M. P. (1973) Failure diagnosis of automata. Cybernetics, Plenum Publishing Corporation, New York, No 4, pp. 653–665.Google Scholar
  23. Unger, S. H. (1969) Asynchronous sequential switching circuits Wiley-Interscience.Google Scholar
  24. Ural, H. (1992) Formal methods for test sequence generation. Computer Communications, Vol. 15, No. 5, pp. 311–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Yannakakis, M. and Lee, D. (1995) Testing finite state machines: fault detection. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 50, pp. 209–227.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Yevtushenko, N. and Petrenko, A. (1989) Fault-detection capability of multiple experiments. Automatic Control and Computer Sciences, Allerton Press, Inc., N.Y., Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 7–11.Google Scholar
  27. Yevtushenko, N. and Petrenko, A. (1990) A method of constructing a test experiment for an arbitrary deterministic automaton. Automatic Control and Computer Sciences, Allerton Press, Inc., N.Y., Vol. 24, No. 5, pp. 65–68.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Petrenko
    • 1
  • N. Yevtushenko
    • 2
  • G. v. Bochmann
    • 3
  1. 1.CRIM, Centre de Recherche Informatique de MontréalMontréalCanada
  2. 2.Tomsk State UniversityTomskRussia
  3. 3.Université de MontréalCentre-Ville, MontréalCanada

Personalised recommendations