Constraint-Based Oracles for Timed Distributed Systems

  • Nassim Benharrat
  • Christophe Gaston
  • Robert M. Hierons
  • Arnault Lapitre
  • Pascale Le Gall
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10533)


This paper studies the situation in which the system under test and the system model are distributed and have the same structure; they have corresponding remote components that communicate asynchronously. In testing, a component with interface \(C_i\) has its own local tester that interacts with \(C_i\) and this local tester observes a local trace consisting of inputs, outputs and durations as perceived by \(C_i\). An observation made in testing is thus a multi-trace: a tuple of (timed) local traces, one for each \(C_i\). The conformance relation for such distributed systems combines a classical unitary conformance relation for localised components and the requirement that the communication policy was satisfied. By expressing the communication policy as a constraint satisfaction problem, we were able to implement the computation of test verdicts by orchestrating localised off-line testing algorithms and the verification of constraints defined by message passing between components. Lastly, we illustrate our approach on a telecommunications system.


Model-based testing Distributed testing Timed input output transition systems Off-line testing Constraint-based testing 


  1. 1.
    Bannour, B., Escobedo, J.P., Gaston, C., Gall, L.P.: Off-line test case generation for timed symbolic model-based conformance testing. In: Nielsen, B., Weise, C. (eds.) ICTSS 2012. LNCS, vol. 7641, pp. 119–135. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-34691-0_10 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barrett, C., Conway, C.L., Deters, M., Hadarean, L., Jovanović, D., King, T., Reynolds, A., Tinelli, C.: CVC4. In: Gopalakrishnan, G., Qadeer, S. (eds.) CAV 2011. LNCS, vol. 6806, pp. 171–177. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-22110-1_14 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brinksma, E., Heerink, L., Tretmans, J.: Factorized test generation for multi-input/output transition systems. In: FIP TC6 11th International Workshop on Testing Communicating Systems (IWTCS), vol. 131 of IFIP Conference Proceedings, pp. 67–82. Kluwer (1998)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Clarke, D., Jéron, T., Rusu, V., Zinovieva, E.: STG: a symbolic test generation tool. In: Katoen, J.-P., Stevens, P. (eds.) TACAS 2002. LNCS, vol. 2280, pp. 470–475. Springer, Heidelberg (2002). doi:10.1007/3-540-46002-0_34 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dutertre, B.: Yices 2.2. In: Biere, A., Bloem, R. (eds.) CAV 2014. LNCS, vol. 8559, pp. 737–744. Springer, Cham (2014). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-08867-9_49 Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gaston, C., Hierons, R.M., Gall, L.P.: An implementation relation and test framework for timed distributed systems. In: Yenigün, H., Yilmaz, C., Ulrich, A. (eds.) ICTSS 2013. LNCS, vol. 8254, pp. 82–97. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-41707-8_6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gotlieb, A.: Constraint-based testing: an emerging trend in software testing. Adv. Comput. 99, 67–101 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Grieskamp, W., Kicillof, N., Stobie, K., Braberman, V.: Model-based quality assurance of protocol documentation: tools and methodology. J. Softw. Testing Verification Reliab. 21(1), 55–71 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hierons, R.M., Merayo, M.G., Núñez, M.: Implementation relations for the distributed test architecture. In: Suzuki, K., Higashino, T., Ulrich, A., Hasegawa, T. (eds.) FATES/TestCom -2008. LNCS, vol. 5047, pp. 200–215. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). doi:10.1007/978-3-540-68524-1_15 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hierons, R.M., Merayo, M.G., Núñez, M.: Using time to add order to distributed testing. In: Giannakopoulou, D., Méry, D. (eds.) FM 2012. LNCS, vol. 7436, pp. 232–246. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-32759-9_20 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Joint Technical Committee ISO/IEC JTC 1. International Standard ISO/IEC 9646–1. Information Technology - Open Systems Interconnection - Conformance testing methodology, framework - Part 1: General concepts. ISO/IEC (1994)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jourdan, G.-V., Ural, H., Yenigün, H., Zhu, D.: Using a SAT solver to generate checking sequences. In: The 24th International Symposium on Computer and Information Sciences, ISCIS 2009, pp. 549–554. IEEE (2009)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Krichen, M.: A formal framework for black-box conformance testing of distributed real-time systems. Int. J. Crit. Comput. Based Syst. 3(1/2), 26–43 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Krichen, M., Tripakis, S.: Black-box conformance testing for real-time systems. In: Graf, S., Mounier, L. (eds.) SPIN 2004. LNCS, vol. 2989, pp. 109–126. Springer, Heidelberg (2004). doi:10.1007/978-3-540-24732-6_8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Krichen, M., Tripakis, S.: Conformance testing for real-time systems. Form. Methods Syst. Des. 34(3), 238–304 (2009)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nguyen, H.N., Zaïdi, F., Cavalli, A.R.: A framework for distributed testing of timed composite systems. In: 21st Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference, APSEC, pp. 47–54. IEEE (2014)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Petrenko, A., Yevtushenko, N.: Testing from partial deterministic FSM specifications. IEEE Trans. Comput. 54(9), 1154–1165 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ericsson International report. Investigation on how to integrate Diversity (MBT tool) and Titan (TTCN-3 executor) to provide an open source MBT tool chain (2016)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sarikaya, B., von Bochmann, G.: Synchronization and specification issues in protocol testing. IEEE Trans. Commun. 32, 389–395 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Schmaltz, J., Tretmans, J.: On conformance testing for timed systems. In: Cassez, F., Jard, C. (eds.) FORMATS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5215, pp. 250–264. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). doi:10.1007/978-3-540-85778-5_18 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tretmans, J.: Model based testing with labelled transition systems. In: Hierons, R.M., Bowen, J.P., Harman, M. (eds.) Formal Methods and Testing. LNCS, vol. 4949, pp. 1–38. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). doi:10.1007/978-3-540-78917-8_1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Vain, J., Halling, E., Kanter, G., Anier, A., Pal, D.: Automatic distribution of local testers for testing distributed systems. In: 12th International Baltic Conference on Databases and Information Systems IX, vol. 291, pp. 297–310. IOS Press (2016)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nassim Benharrat
    • 1
    • 3
  • Christophe Gaston
    • 1
  • Robert M. Hierons
    • 2
  • Arnault Lapitre
    • 1
  • Pascale Le Gall
    • 3
  1. 1.CEA, LIST, Laboratory of Model Driven Engineering for Embedded SystemsGif-sur-YvetteFrance
  2. 2.Brunel University LondonUxbridgeUK
  3. 3.Laboratoire MICS, CentraleSupélec, Université Paris-SaclayChâtenay-MalabryFrance

Personalised recommendations