Model-Based Testing Service on the Web

  • Antti Jääskeläinen
  • Mika Katara
  • Antti Kervinen
  • Henri Heiskanen
  • Mika Maunumaa
  • Tuula Pääkkönen
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5047)


Model-based testing (MBT) seems to be technically superior to conventional test automation. However, MBT features some difficulties that can hamper its deployment in industrial contexts. We are developing a domain-specific MBT solution for graphical user interface (GUI) testing of Symbian S60 smartphone applications. We believe that such a tailor-made solution can be easier to deploy than ones that are more generic. In this paper, we present a service concept and an associated web interface that hide the inherent complexity of the test generation algorithms and large test models. The interface enables an easy-to-use MBT service based on the well-known keyword concept. With this solution, a better separation of concerns can be obtained between the test modeling tasks that often require special expertise, and test execution that can be performed by testers. We believe that this can significantly speed up the industrial transfer of model-based testing technologies, at least in this context.


  1. 1.
    Utting, M., Legeard, B.: Practical Model-Based Testing: A Tools Approach. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Campbell, C., Grieskamp, W., Nachmanson, L., Schulte, W., Tillmann, N., Veanes, M.: Testing concurrent object-oriented systems with Spec Explorer. In: Fitzgerald, J.S., Hayes, I.J., Tarlecki, A. (eds.) FM 2005. LNCS, vol. 3582, pp. 542–547. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Robinson, H.: Obstacles and opportunities for model-based testing in an industrial software environment. In: Proceedings of the 1st European Conference on Model-Driven Software Engineering, Nuremberg, Germany, pp. 118–127 (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hartman, A.: AGEDIS project final report. Cited (March 2008),
  5. 5.
    Katara, M., Kervinen, A., Maunumaa, M., Pääkkönen, T., Satama, M.: Towards deploying model-based testing with a domain-specific modeling approach. In: Proceedings of TAIC PART – Testing: Academic & Industrial Conference, Windsor, UK, pp. 81–89. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Symbian Cited (March 2008),
  7. 7.
    S60. Cited (March 2008),
  8. 8.
    OMG: UML testing profile, v 1.0. Cited (March 2008),
  9. 9.
    Kervinen, A., Maunumaa, M., Pääkkönen, T., Katara, M.: Model-based testing through a GUI. In: Grieskamp, W., Weise, C. (eds.) FATES 2005. LNCS, vol. 3997, pp. 16–31. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kervinen, A., Maunumaa, M., Katara, M.: Controlling testing using three-tier model architecture. In: Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Model Based Testing (MBT 2006), Vienna, Austria. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 164(4), pp. 53–66. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Katara, M., Kervinen, A.: Making model-based testing more agile: a use case driven approach. In: Bin, E., Ziv, A., Ur, S. (eds.) HVC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4383, pp. 219–234. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Katara, M., Kervinen, A., Maunumaa, M., Pääkkönen, T., Jääskeläinen, A.: Can I have some model-based GUI tests please? Providing a model-based testing service through a web interface. In: Proceedings of the second annual Conference of the Association for Software Testing (CAST 2007), Bellevue, WA, USA (2007)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jääskeläinen, A.: A domain-specific tool for creation and management of test models. Master’s thesis, Tampere University of Technology (2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Boehm, B., Turner, R.: Balancing Agility and Discipline: A Guide for the Perplexed. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2004)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rook, P.: Controlling software projects. Softw. Eng. J. 1, 7–16 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Buwalda, H.: Action figures. STQE Magazine, 42–47 (March/April 2003)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fewster, M., Graham, D.: Software Test Automation: Effective use of test execution tools. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1999)MATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Valmari, A.: The state explosion problem. In: Lectures on Petri Nets I: Basic Models, London, UK, pp. 429–528. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Python: Python Programming Language homepage. Cited (March 2008),
  20. 20.
    Karsisto, K.: A new parallel composition operator for verification tools. Doctoral dissertation, Tampere University of Technology (number 420 in publications) (2003)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Satama, M.: Event capturing tool for model-based GUI test automation. Master’s thesis, Tampere University of Technology (2006), Cited March 2008,
  22. 22.
    HP: Mercury Functional Testing homepage. Cited (March 2008),
  23. 23.
    Zakas, N.C., McPeak, J., Fawcett, J.: Professional Ajax, 2nd edn. Wiley, Chichester (2007)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Taipale, O., Smolander, K.: Improving software testing by observing practice. In: ISESE 2006. Proceedings of the 2006 ACM/IEEE international symposium on empirical software engineering, pp. 262–271. ACM Press, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Microsoft: Microsoft unveils vision and road map to simplify SOA, bridge software plus services, and take composite applications mainstream (2007-11-28). Cited March 2008,

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Antti Jääskeläinen
    • 1
  • Mika Katara
    • 1
  • Antti Kervinen
    • 1
  • Henri Heiskanen
    • 1
  • Mika Maunumaa
    • 1
  • Tuula Pääkkönen
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Software SystemsTampere University of TechnologyTampereFinland
  2. 2.Nokia DevicesTampereFinland

Personalised recommendations