Structural Refinement: An Effective OCL-Based Testing Approach

  • A. Jalila
  • D. Jeya Mala
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 324)


Formal software development begins with formal specification of the user requirements or design of a system. Hence, formal specification languages are used to resolve ambiguities in user requirements or detect design errors at the early software life cycle. Furthermore, specification-based functional testing derives test inputs from its formal specification. However, formal specifications are expressed using set theory or predicate logics which are non-executable. Thus, functional test execution over abstract expressions would be impossible. Therefore, there is a need to refine abstract specification into a form that can be executable. In this paper, an automatic functional testing framework using object constraint language (OCL) formal specification has been proposed. The major objective of this paper is to describe how the refinement processes are integrated into the specification-based testing framework.


OCL Structural refinement Fitness function Specification testing 



This paper is a part of the UGC major research project supported by University Grants Commission (UGC), New Delhi, India.


  1. 1.
    F. Elberzhager, F.L. Alla Rosbach, J. Münch, R. Eschbach, Reducing test effort: a systematic mapping study on existing approaches. Inf. Softw. Technol. 54, 1092–1106 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    D.R. Kuhn, Fault classes and error detection capability of specification based testing. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 8, 411–424 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    K.C. Tai, M.A. Vouk, A.M. Paradkar, P. Lu, Evaluation of a predicate-based software testing strategy. IBM Syst. J. 33, 445–457 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    A.D. Brucker, M.P. Krieger, D. Longuet, B. Wolff, A specification-based test case generation method for UML/OCL, in International Conference on Models in Software Engineering (2011)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    M. Benattou, J.M. Bruel, N. Hameurlain, Generating test data from OCL specification, in Proceedings of the ECOOP’2002 Work-Shop on Integration and Transformation of UML Models (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    S. Ali, M.Z. Iqbal, A. Arcuri, L. Briand, Generating test data from OCL constraints with search techniques. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 39, 1376–1402 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    F. Heidenreich, OCL-Codegenerierung für Deklarative Sprachen, Master’s thesis (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    J. Cabot, R. Clariso, D. Riera (2007), UMLtoCSP: a tool for the formal verification of ´UML/OCL models using constraint programming, in Proceedings of the 22nd IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, ASE ’07 Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    J. Carsí, I. Ramos, A. Boronat, A. Gomez, The MOMENT: MOdelManageMENT ´framework project (2008)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    B. Beckert, R. Hahnle, P.H. Schmitt, Verification of object-oriented software: the KeY approach (Springer, Berlin, 2007), p. 4334Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer India 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Thiagarajar College of EngineeringMaduraiIndia

Personalised recommendations