Conformance Tests as Checking Experiments for Partial Nondeterministic FSM

  • Alexandre Petrenko
  • Nina Yevtushenko
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3997)


The paper addresses the problem of conformance test generation from input/output FSMs that might be partially specified and nondeterministic. Two conformance relations are considered, quasi-reduction and quasi-equivalence. The former requires that in response to each input sequence defined in a specification FSM, a conforming implementation FSM produces only output sequences of the specification FSM, while the latter is stronger: a conforming implementation FSM must produce all of them and nothing else. For each relation, a test generation method is elaborated. The resulting tests are proven to be complete, i.e., sound and exhaustive, for a given bound on the number of states; they include as special cases checking experiments for deterministic FSMs.


Core Cover Reachable State Complete Test Check Experiment Conformance Test 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    AboElFotoh, H., Abou-Rabia, O., Ural, H.: A Test Generation Algorithm for Protocols Modeled as Non-Deterministic FSMs. The Software Eng. Journal 8(4), 184–188 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alur, R., Courcoubetis, C., Yannakakis, M.: Distinguishing Tests for Nondeterministic and Probabilistic Machines. In: 27th ACM Symp. on Theory of Comp., pp. 363–372 (1995)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boroday, S.Y.: Distinguishing Tests for Non-Deterministic Finite State Machines. In: Testing of Communicating Systems, IFIP TC6 11th International Workshop on Testing of Communicating Systems, pp. 101–107. Kluwer, Dordrecht (1998)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dorofeeva, M., Petrenko, A., Vetrova, M., Yevtushenko, N.: Adaptive Test Generation from a nondeterministic FSM. Radioelektronika i informatika 3, 91–95 (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hierons, R.M.: Adaptive Testing of a Deterministic Implementation against a Nondeterministic Finite State Machine. The Computer Journal 41(5), 349–355 (1998)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hierons, R.M.: Testing from a Non-Deterministic Finite State Machine Using Adaptive State Counting. IEEE Transactions on Computers 53(10), 1330–1342 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hierons, R.M.: Using Candidates to Test a Deterministic Implementation Against a Non-deterministic Finite State Machine. The Computer Journal 46(3), 307–318 (2003)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hierons, R.M., Ural, H.: Concerning the Ordering of Adaptive Test Sequences. In: König, H., Heiner, M., Wolisz, A. (eds.) FORTE 2003. LNCS, vol. 2767, pp. 289–302. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hwang, T., Kim, S., Hong, J.: Test Selection for a Nondeterministic FSM. Computer Communications 24/12(7), 1213–1223 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kloosterman, H.: Test Derivation from Non-Deterministic Finite State Machines. In: Protocol Test Systems, V, Proceedings of the IFIP TC6/WG6.1 Fifth International Workshop on Protocol Test Systems, Canada, 1992, pp. 297–308. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1993)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kufareva, I., Yevtushenko, N., Petrenko, A.: Design of Tests for Nondeterministic Machines with Respect to Reduction. Automatic Control and Computer Sciences 3 (1998)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Luo, G.L., Bochmann, G.v., Petrenko, A.: Test Selection Based on Communicating Nondeterministic Finite-State Machines Using a Generalized Wp-method. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 20(2), 149–161 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Luo, G., Petrenko, A., Bochmann, G.v.: Selecting Test Sequences for Partially Specified Nondeterministic Finite State Machines. In: the IFIP Seventh International Workshop on Protocol Test Systems, Japan, pp. 95–118 (1994)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Miller, R., Chen, D., Lee, D., Hao, R.: Coping with Nondeterminism in Network Protocol Testing. In: Khendek, F., Dssouli, R. (eds.) TestCom 2005. LNCS, vol. 3502, Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nachmanson, L., Veanes, M., Schulte, W., Tillmann, N., Grieskamp, W.: Optimal Strategies for Testing Nondeterministic Systems. In: ISSTA 2004, Software Engineering Notes, vol. 29, pp. 55–64. ACM, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Petrenko, A.: Checking Experiments with Protocol Machines. In: Proceedings of the IFIP Fourth International Workshop on Protocol Test Systems, The Netherlands, pp. 83–94 (1991)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Petrenko, A., Yevtushenko, N., Lebedev, A., Das, A.: Nondeterministic State Machines in Protocol Conformance Testing. In: Proceedings of the IFIP Sixth International Workshop on Protocol Test Systems, France, pp. 363–378 (1993)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Petrenko, A., Yevtushenko, N., Bochmann, G.v.: Testing Deterministic Implementations from their Nondeterministic Specifications. In: Proceedings of the IFIP Ninth International Workshop on Testing of Communicating Systems, pp. 125–140 (1996)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Petrenko, A., Yevtushenko, N.: On Test Derivation from Partial Specifications. In: Proceedings of the IFIP Joint International Conference, FORTE/PSTV 2000, on Formal Description Techniques for Distributed Systems and Communication Protocols, and Protocol Specification, Testing, and Verification, Italy, pp. 85–102 (2000)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Petrenko, A., Yevtushenko, N.: Testing from Partial Deterministic FSM Specifications. IEEE Transactions on Computers 54(9), 1154–1165 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tripathy, P., Naik, K.: Generation of Adaptive Test Cases from Nondeterministic Finite State Models. In: Protocol Test Systems, V, Proceedings of the IFIP TC6/WG6.1 Fifth International Workshop on Protocol Test Systems, pp. 309–320. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1993)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zhang, F., Cheung, T.: Optimal Transfer Trees and Distinguishing Trees for Testing Observable Nondeterministic Finite-State Machines. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 29(1), 1–14 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Yevtushenko, N., Lebedev, A., Petrenko, A.: On Checking Experiments with Nondeterministic Automata. Automatic Control and Computer Sciences 6, 81–85 (1991)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexandre Petrenko
    • 1
  • Nina Yevtushenko
    • 2
  1. 1.CRIM, Centre de recherche informatique de MontréalMontrealCanada
  2. 2.Tomsk State UniversityTomskRussia

Personalised recommendations