Advertisement

Conformance Relations for Distributed Testing Based on CSP

  • Ana Cavalcanti
  • Marie-Claude Gaudel
  • Robert M. Hierons
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7019)

Abstract

CSP is a well established process algebra that provides comprehensive theoretical and practical support for refinement-based design and verification of systems. Recently, a testing theory for CSP has also been presented. In this paper, we explore the problem of testing from a CSP specification when observations are made by a set of distributed testers. We build on previous work on input-output transition systems, but the use of CSP leads to significant differences, since some of its conformance (refinement) relations consider failures as well as traces. In addition, we allow events to be observed by more than one tester. We show how the CSP notions of refinement can be adapted to distributed testing. We consider two contexts: when the testers are entirely independent and when they can cooperate. Finally, we give some preliminary results on test-case generation and the use of coordination messages.

Keywords

Local Test Trace Model Conformance Relation External Choice Internal Choice 
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.

References

  1. 1.
    Brinksma, E., Heerink, L., Tretmans, J.: Factorized test generation for multi-input/output transition systems. In: 11th IFIP Workshop on Testing of Communicating Systems, pp. 67–82. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1998)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cacciari, L., Rafiq, O.: Controllability and observability in distributed testing. IST 41(11-12), 767–780 (1999)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cavalcanti, A.L.C., Gaudel, M.-C.: Testing for Refinement in CSP. In: Butler, M., Hinchey, M.G., Larrondo-Petrie, M.M. (eds.) ICFEM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4789, pp. 151–170. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dssouli, R., Bochmann, G.v.: Error detection with multiple observers. In: PSTV, pp. 483–494. Elsevier Science, Amsterdam (1985)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hierons, R.M.: Overcoming controllability problems in distributed testing from an input output transition system (submitted), people.brunel.ac.uk/~csstrmh/coord.pdf
  6. 6.
    Hierons, R.M., Merayo, M.G., Núñez, M.: Controllable test cases for the distributed test architecture. In: Cha, S(S.), Choi, J.-Y., Kim, M., Lee, I., Viswanathan, M. (eds.) ATVA 2008. LNCS, vol. 5311, pp. 201–215. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hierons, R.M., Merayo, M.G., Nunez, M.: Implementation relations for the distributed test architecture. In: Suzuki, K., Higashino, T., Ulrich, A., Hasegawa, T. (eds.) TestCom/FATES 2008. LNCS, vol. 5047, pp. 200–215. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hierons, R.M., Merayo, M.G., Núñez, M.: Scenarios-based testing of systems with distributed ports. Software - Practice and Experience (accepted for publication, 2011), doi:10.1002/spe.1062Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hierons, R.M., Nunez, M.: Scenarios-based testing of systems with distributed ports. In: 10th QSIC (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jacob, J.: Refinement of shared systems. In: The Theory and Practice of Refinement, pp. 27–36. Butterworths (1989)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jard, C.: Synthesis of distributed testers from true-concurrency models of reactive systems. IST 45(12), 805–814 (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jard, C., Jéron, T., Kahlouche, H., Viho, C.: Towards automatic distribution of testers for distributed conformance testing. In: FORTE, pp. 353–368. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1998)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pickin, S., Jard, C., Traon, Y.L., Jéron, T., Jézéquel, J.-M., Guennec, A.L.: System test synthesis from UML models of distributed software. In: Peled, D.A., Vardi, M.Y. (eds.) FORTE 2002. LNCS, vol. 2529, pp. 97–113. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Roscoe, A.W.: The Theory and Practice of Concurrency. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1998)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sarikaya, B., Bochmann, G.v.: Synchronization and specification issues in protocol testing. IEEE Transactions on Communications 32, 389–395 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ural, H., Williams, C.: Constructing checking sequences for distributed testing. FAC 18(1), 84–101 (2006)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ana Cavalcanti
    • 1
  • Marie-Claude Gaudel
    • 2
  • Robert M. Hierons
    • 3
  1. 1.University of YorkUK
  2. 2.LRI, Université de Paris-Sud and CNRSFrance
  3. 3.Brunel UniversityUK

Personalised recommendations