Abstract
Observation objectives are behaviours that an implementation under test is expected to exhibit during testing. It is desirable to express the objectives at a high level of behavioural abstraction. Unfortunately, current specification methods do not offer proper expressiveness for this. In this paper we demonstrate how observation objectives can be declared when the specification of a system consists of a formal abstraction hierarchy.
This work has been partly funded by Academy of Finland (project 5100005).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
The DisCo project WWWpage (2001), At http://disco.cs.tut.fi on the World Wide Web
Aaltonen, T., Helin, J.: Formal basis for testing with joint-action specifications. In: Hierons, R., Jéron, T.(eds) Proceedings of Formal Approaches To Testing 2002 (FATES 2002), A satellite workshop of CONCUR 2002, August 2002, pp. 65–77 (2002)
Aaltonen, T., Katara, M., Pitkänen, R.: DisCo toolset – the newgeneration. Journal of Universal Computer Science 7(1), 3–18 (2001), http://www.jucs.org
Aaltonen, T., Kellomäki, P., Pitkänen, R.: Specifying Cash-Point with DisCo. Formal Aspects of Computing 12(4), 231–232 (2000)
Aaltonen, T., Mikkonen, T.: Managing software evolution with a formalized abstraction hierarchy. In: Martin, D.C. (ed.) Proceedings of the Eighth IEEE International Conference on Engineering of Complex Computer Systems, ICECCS 2002, Greenbelt, Maryland, USA, December 2002, pp. 224–231. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2002)
Back, R.J.R., Kurki-Suonio, R.: Distributed cooperation with action systems. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems 10(4), 513–554 (1988)
Back, R.J.R., Kurki-Suonio, R.: Decentralization of process nets with centralized control. Distributed Computing 3, 73–87 (1989)
Bergmann, J.P., Horowitz, M.: Improving coverage analysis and test generation for large designs. In: Proceedings of The International Conference on Computer-Aided Design (ICCAD 1999), November 1999, pp. 580–583 (1999)
Friedman, G., Hartman, A., Nagin, K., Shiran, T.: Projected state machine coverage for software testing. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes 27(4), 134–143 (2002)
Grieskamp, W., Gurevich, Y., Schulte, W., Veanes, M.: Generating finite state machines from abstract state machines. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes 27(4), 112–122 (2002)
Lam, S., Shankar, A.: Protocol verification via projections. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering SE-10(4), 325–342 (1984)
Lamport, L.: The temporal logic of actions. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems 16(3), 872–923 (1994)
Vries, R.G., Tretmans, J.: Towards formal test purposes. In: Brinksma, E., Tretmans, J. (eds.) Proceedings of workshop on Formal Approaches to Testiong of Software 2001, August 2001, pp. 61–76 (2001)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2004 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Aaltonen, T. (2004). Defining Observation Objectives for Reactive and Distributed Systems. In: Petrenko, A., Ulrich, A. (eds) Formal Approaches to Software Testing. FATES 2003. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2931. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-24617-6_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-24617-6_8
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-20894-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-24617-6
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive