A Language for Test Case Refinement in the Test Template Framework

  • Maximiliano Cristia
  • Diego Hollmann
  • Pablo Albertengo
  • Claudia Frydman
  • Pablo Rodriguez Monetti
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6991)

Abstract

Model-based testing (MBT) generates test cases by analysing a formal model of the system under test (SUT). In many MBT methods, these test cases are too abstract to be executed. Therefore, an executable representation of them is necessary to test the SUT. So far, the MBT community has focused on methods that automate the generation of test cases, but less has been done in making them executable. In this paper we propose a language to specify rules that can be automatically applied to produce an executable representation of test cases generated by the Test Template Framework (TTF), a MBT method for the Z notation.

Keywords

Programming Language Banking System Saving Account System Under Test Disjunctive Normal Form 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Utting, M., Legeard, B.: Practical Model-Based Testing: A Tools Approach. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco (2006)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hierons, R.M., et al.: Using formal specifications to support testing. ACM Comput. Surv. 41(2), 1–76 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Stocks, P., Carrington, D.: A Framework for Specification-Based Testing. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 22(11), 777–793 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Grieskamp, W., Gurevich, Y., Schulte, W., Veanes, M.: Generating finite state machines from abstract state machines. In: ISSTA 2002: Proceedings of the 2002 ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis, pp. 112–122. ACM, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Legeard, B., Peureux, F., Utting, M.: A comparison of the BTT and TTF test-generation methods. In: Bert, D., Bowen, J. (eds.) B 2002 and ZB 2002. LNCS, vol. 2272, pp. 309–329. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bernot, G., Gaudel, M.C., Marre, B.: Software testing based on formal specifications: a theory and a tool. Softw. Eng. J. 6(6), 387–405 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Posey, B.: Just Enough Software Test Automation. Prentice Hall PTR, Upper Saddle River (2002)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fewster, M., Graham, D.: Software test automation: effective use of test execution tools. ACM Press/Addison-Wesley Publishing Co. (1999)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Information Technology, I.S.O.: – Z Formal Specification Notation – Syntax, Type System and Semantics. Technical Report ISO/IEC 13568, International Organization for Standardization (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ammann, P., Offutt, J.: Using formal methods to derive test frames in category-partition testing. In: Compass 1994: 9th Annual Conference on Computer Assurance, pp. 69–80. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hall, P.A.V.: Towards testing with respect to formal specification. In: Proc. Second IEE/BCS Conference on Software Engineering, IEE/BCS Conference Publication, vol. 290, pp. 159–163 (July 1988)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hierons, R.M., Sadeghipour, S., Singh, H.: Testing a system specified using Statecharts and Z. Information and Software Technology 43(2), 137–149 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hierons, R.M.: Testing from a Z specification. Software Testing, Verification & Reliability 7, 19–33 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hörcher, H.M., Peleska, J.: Using Formal Specifications to Support Software Testing. Software Quality Journal 4, 309–327 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Stocks, P.: Applying Formal Methods to Software Testing. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Queensland (1993)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Maccoll, I., Carrington, D.: Extending the Test Template Framework. In: Proceedings of the Third Northern Formal Methods Workshop (1998)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cristiá, M., Rodríguez Monetti, P.: Implementing and applying the stocks-carrington framework for model-based testing. In: Breitman, K., Cavalcanti, A. (eds.) ICFEM 2009. LNCS, vol. 5885, pp. 167–185. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cristiá, M., Albertengo, P., Rodríguez Monetti, P.: Pruning testing trees in the Test Template Framework by detecting mathematical contradictions. In: Fiadeiro, J.L., Gnesi, S. (eds.) SEFM, pp. 268–277. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2010)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cristiá, M., Albertengo, P., Rodríguez Monetti, P.: Fastest: a model-based testing tool for the Z notation. In: Mazzanti, F., Trentani, G. (eds.) PTD-SEFM, Consiglio Nazionale della Ricerche, Pisa, Italy, pp. 3–8 (2010)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Derrick, J., Boiten, E.: Testing refinements of state-based formal specifications. Software Testing, Verification and Reliability (9), 27–50 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cristiá, M., Rodríguez Monetti, P., Albertengo, P.: The FTCRL reference guide. Technical report, Flowgate Consulting (2010)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Potter, B., Till, D., Sinclair, J.: An introduction to formal specification and Z. Prentice Hall PTR, Upper Saddle River (1996)MATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kernighan, B.W., Ritchie, D.M.: The C Programming Language, 2nd edn. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs (1988)MATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Parr, T.: Language Implementation Patterns: Create Your Own Domain-Specific and General Programming Languages, 1st edn. Pragmatic Bookshelf (2009)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Morgan, C.: Programming from specifications, 2nd edn. Prentice Hall International (UK) Ltd., Hertfordshire (1994)MATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Back, R.J., Wright, J.V.: Refinement Calculus: A Systematic Introduction, 1st edn. Springer-Verlag New York, Inc., Secaucus (1998)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Guttag, J.V., Horning, J.J.: Larch: languages and tools for formal specification. Springer-Verlag New York, Inc., New York (1993)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Carrington, D.A., MacColl, I., McDonald, J., Murray, L., Strooper, P.A.: From object-z specifications to classbench test suites. Softw. Test., Verif. Reliab. 10(2), 111–137 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Bouquet, F., Legeard, B.: Reification of executable test scripts in formal specicifation-based test generation: The Java card transaction mechanism case study. In: Araki, K., Gnesi, S., Mandrioli, D. (eds.) FME 2003. LNCS, vol. 2805, pp. 778–795. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Benz, S.: Aspectt: aspect-oriented test case instantiation. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Aspect-oriented Software Development, AOSD 2008, pp. 1–12. ACM, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Meyer, B., Fiva, A., Ciupa, I., Leitner, A., Wei, Y., Stapf, E.: Programs that test themselves. Computer 42, 46–55 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maximiliano Cristia
    • 2
    • 3
  • Diego Hollmann
    • 2
  • Pablo Albertengo
    • 1
  • Claudia Frydman
    • 3
  • Pablo Rodriguez Monetti
    • 4
  1. 1.Flowgate ConsultingRosarioArgentina
  2. 2.CIFASIS-UNRRosarioArgentina
  3. 3.LSIS-UPCAMMarseilleFrance
  4. 4.FCEIA-UNRRosarioArgentina

Personalised recommendations