Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Innovations and Advanced Techniques in Computer and Information Sciences and Engineering pp 415–420Cite as

Dealing with Concurrent Regions during Scenario Generation from Activity Diagrams

  • Conference paper

Abstract

Scenarios are a popular focus for the acquisition and validation of system requirements and in the generation of system-based test-cases. However, generating scenarios manually is a tedious process, which may introduce errors or produce incomplete scenario sets. This paper discusses an approach to scenario capture, in support of requirements engineering that can then be used for test-scenario capture and test-case generation. The approach has been automated successfully, producing usage-scenarios from UML (Unified Modelling Language) Activity Diagrams without the need for manual intervention. The paper walks through the approach - with a specific focus on the processing of concurrent regions - and compares the results with other approaches applied to the same UML activity model.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (Canada)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (Canada)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (Canada)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (Canada)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. T. A. Alspaugh, D. J. Richardson, and T. A. Standish. Scenarios, state machines and purpose-driven testing. In SCESM ’05: Proceedings of the fourth international workshop on Scenarios and state machines: models, algorithms and tools, pages 1–5, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  2. D. Amyot, X. He, Y. He, and D. Y. Cho. Generating scenarios from use case map specifications. In 3rd International Conference on Quality Software (QSIC’03), pages 108–115, Dallas, USA, 2003. IEEE Computer.

    Google Scholar 

  3. X. Bai, C. P. Lam, and H. Li. An approach to generate the thin-threads from the UML diagrams. In 28th Annual International Computer Software and Applications Conference (COMPSAC’04), pages 546–552, Hong Kong, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  4. A. Bertolino, P. Inverardi, and H. Muccini. Formal methods in testing software architectures. In Formal Methods for Software Architectures: Third International School on Formal Methods for the Design of Computer, Communication and Software Systems: Software Architectures, SFM 2003, volume 2804/2003, pages 122–147, Bertinoro, Italy, 2003. LNCS.

    Google Scholar 

  5. K. K. Breitman, J. C. S. d. P. Leite, and D. Berry. Supporting scenario evolution. Requirements Engineering, 10(2):112–131, May 2005.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  6. L. Briand, Y. Labiche, and G. Soccar. Automating impact analysis and regression test selection based on UML designs. In International Conference on Software Maintenance (ICSM’02), pages 252–261, Montreal, Canada, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  7. R. Chandler, C. P. Lam, and H. Li. AD2US: An automated approach to generating usage scenarios from UML activity diagrams. In 12th Asia Pacific Software Engineering Conference (APSEC’05), pages 9–16, Taipei, Taiwan, December 15-17 2005. IEEE Computer Society.

    Google Scholar 

  8. R. Chandler, H. Li, and C. P. Lam. Generating usage scenarios automatically from UML activity diagrams. Technical Report TR-06-01, Edith Cowan University, Western Australia, May 2006. Available: textsfunderline http://www.scis.ecu.edu.au/research/groups/se/selectedpublications.aspx.

    Google Scholar 

  9. M. Gogolla, J. Bohling, and M. Richters. Validation of UML and OCL models by automatic snapshot generation. In The Unified Modelling Language: Modelling Languages and Applications (UML’2003), volume 2863/2003, pages 265–279. LNCS, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  10. A. Hartman. AGEDIS: The final project report. Technical Report AGEDIS -1999 -20218, IBM, underline hartman@il.ibm.com , Feb 16 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  11. G. Kosters, H.-W. Six, and M. Winter. Coupling use cases and class models as a means for validation and verification of requirements specification. Requirements Engineering, 6(1):14, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  12. W. J. Lee, S. D. Cha, and Y. R. Kwon. Integration and analysis of use cases using modular Petri nets in requirements engineering. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 24(12), Nov 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  13. H. Li and C. P. Lam. Using ant-like agents to generate test threads from UML diagrams. LNCS, SCI-E(Jan), 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  14. X. Li, J. Hu, L. Bu, J. Zhao, and G. Zheng. Consistency checking of concurrent models for scenario-based specifications. LNCS, 3530(Jan):298–312, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  15. J. P. L’opez-Grao, J. Merseguer, and J. Campos. From UML activity diagrams to stochastic Petri nets: application to software performance engineering. In WOSP ’04: Proceedings of the fourth international workshop on Software and performance, pages 25–36, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  16. B. Mitchell, R. Thomson, and P. Bristow. Scenario synthesis from imprecise requirements. LNCS, 3319(Jan):122–137, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  17. C. Nebut, F. Fleury, Y. Le Traon, and J.-M. J’ez’equel. Automatic test generation: A use case driven approach. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 32(3):140–155, 2006.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  18. D. of Defense. End-to-end integration test guidebook. Technical report Version 1.0, USA Dept. of Defense, Dec 2000. Available: textsfunderline http://asusrl.eas.asu.edu/E2E/paper/dec28Book.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  19. J. Offutt, L. Shaoying, A. Abdurazik, and P. Ammann. Generating test data from state-based specifications. The Journal of Software Testing, Verification and Reliability, 13(1):25–53, 2003.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  20. OMG. Unified Modelling Language, v2.0 superstructure. Standard - Technical Report ptc/03-08-02, Object Management Group, April 2004 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  21. G. Sabaliauskaite, F. Matsukawa, S. Kusomoto, and K. Inoue. An experimental comparison of checklist-based reading and perspective-based reading for UML design document inspection. In 2002 International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering (ISESE’02), pages 148–160, Nara, Japan, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  22. J. E. Shin, A. G. Sutcliffe, and A. Gregoriades. Scenario advisor tool for requirements engineering. Requirements Engineering, 10(2):132–145, 2005.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  23. S. S. Som’e. Enhancement of a use cases based requirements engineering approach with scenarios. In 12th Asia Pacific Software Engineering Conference (APSEC’05), pages 25–32, Taipei, Taiwan, December 15-17 2005. IEEE Computer Society.

    Google Scholar 

  24. A. G. Sutcliffe, N. A. Maiden, S. Minocha, and D. Manuel. Supporting scenario-based requirements engineering. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 24(12):1072–1088, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  25. L. Wang, J. Yuan, X. Yu, J. Hu, X. Li, and G. Zheng. Generating test cases from UML activity diagram based on gray-box method. In 11th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference (APSEC’04), pages 284–291, Busan, Korea, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  26. D. Xu, H. Li, and C. P. Lam. Using adaptive agents to automatically generate test scenarios from the UML activity diagrams. In 12th Asia Pacific Software Engineering Conference (APSEC’05), pages 385–392, Taipei, Taiwan, December 15-17 2005. IEEE Computer Society.

    Google Scholar 

  27. R. Chandler, H. Li, and C. P. Lam. UML Models with Activity Diagrams: for Case Studies. Technical Report TR-06-02, Edith Cowan University, Western Australia, November 2006. Available: textsfunderline http://www.scis.ecu.edu.au/research/groups/se/selectedpublications.aspx.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Edith Cowan University, Mount Lawley, Western Australia 6050, Bradford Street

    Robert Chandler, Chiou Peng Lam & Huaizhong Li

Authors
  1. Robert Chandler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chiou Peng Lam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Huaizhong Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Bridgeport, CT, USA

    Tarek Sobh

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2007 Springer

About this paper

Cite this paper

Chandler, R., Lam, C.P., Li, H. (2007). Dealing with Concurrent Regions during Scenario Generation from Activity Diagrams. In: Sobh, T. (eds) Innovations and Advanced Techniques in Computer and Information Sciences and Engineering. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6268-1_74

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6268-1_74

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-6267-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-6268-1

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

search

Navigation