Test sequence selection method for statecharts

Software Testing Verification and Reliability

Volumn 10, Issue 4, 2000, Pages 203-227

  Hong, Hyoung Seok ^a   Kim, Young Gon ^a   Cha, Sung Deok ^a   Bae, Doo Hwan ^a   Ural, Hasan ^b  

^a Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST)   (South Korea)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS; COMPUTER SOFTWARE SELECTION AND EVALUATION; DATA FLOW ANALYSIS; FINITE AUTOMATA; GRAPH THEORY; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; SEQUENTIAL MACHINES;

EXTENDED FINITE STATE MACHINES (EFSM); STATECHARTS; TEST SEQUENCE SELECTION METHODS;

REAL TIME SYSTEMS;

EID: 0034476775     PISSN: 09600833     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/1099-1689(200012)10:4<203::AID-STVR212>3.0.CO;2-2     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Harel D, Statecharts: a visual formalism for complex systems. Science of Computer Programming, 1987: 8(3): 231-274.
2. von der Beeck M. A comparison of Statecharts variants. In Formal Techniques in Real-time Fault-tolerant Systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 863, Springer Verlag. 1994: 128-148.
3. Bader A, Sajeev A, Ramakrishnan S. Testing concurrency and communication in distributed objects. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on High Performance Computing 1999; 422-428.
4. Bogdanov K. Holcombe M. Singh H. Automated test set generation for Statecharts. In Applied Formal Methods. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1641. Springer-Verlag. 1999: 107-121.
5. Kung D. Suchak N, Gao J. Hsia P, Toyoshima Y, Chen C. On object state testing. In Proceedings of Computer Software and Applications Conference 1994; 222-227.
6. Li L, Qi Z. Test selection from UML Statecharts. In Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Technology of Object-oriented Languages and Systems. 1999: 273-279.
7. Offutt J, Abdurazik A. Generating tests from UML specifications. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on the Unified Modeling Language, 1999.
8. Frankl PG. Weyuker EJ. An applicable family of data flow testing criteria. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. 1988: 14(10): 1483-1498.
9. Rapps S, Weyuker EJ. Selecting software test data using data flow information. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. 1985; 11(4): 367-375.
10. Harel D, Naamad A. The STATEMATE semantics of Statecharts. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology. 1996: 5(4): 293-333.
11. von Bochmann G, Petrenko A. Protocol testing: review of methods and relevance for software testing. In Proceedings of the 1994 International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis 1994: 109-124.
12. Femandez J-C. Jard C, Jéron T, Nedelka L, Viho C. Using on-the-fly verification techniques for the generation of test suites. In Computer Aided Verification '96, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1102, Springer Verlag. 1996; 348-359.
13. Grabowski J, Hogrefe D, Scheurer R, Dai ZR. Applying SAM-STAG to the B-ISDN protocol SSCOP. In Testing of Communicating Systems, vol. 10, Chapman & Hall, 1997.
14. Huang S, Lee D, Staskauskas M. Validation based test sequence generation for networks of EFSMs. In Proceedings of IFIP FORTE/PSTV '96.
15. Kerbrat A. Jeron T. Groz R. Automated test generation from SDL specifications. In Proceedings of SDL Forum 1999; 135-151.
16. Miller RE. Paul S. Generating conformance test sequences for combined control and data flow of communication protocols. In Proceedings of PSTV'92: 13-27.
17. Sarikaya B, von Bochniann G, Cemy E. A test design methodology for protocol testing. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 1987: 13(5): 518-531.
18. Ural H. Test sequence selection based on static data flow analysis. Computer Communications, 1987: 10(5): 234-242.
19. Ural H. Yang B. A test sequence selection method for protocol testing. IEEE Transactions on Communications, 1991; 39(4): 514-523.
20. Ural H. Williams A. Test generation by exposing control and data dependencies within system specifications in SDL. In Proceedings of IFIP 6th International Conference on Formal Description Techniques, FORTE'93; 339-354.
21. ITU-T. Recommendation X. 904 - Information Technology - Open Distributed Processing - Reference Model: Architectural Semantics. December 1997.
22. Chan W. Anderson RJ. Beanie P, Bums S. Modugno F, Notkin D, Reese JD. Model checking large software specifications. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 1998: 24(7): 498-520.
23. Berry G, Gonthier G. The ESTEREL synchronous programming language: design, semantics, implementation. Science of Computer Programming, 1992; 19(2): 87-152.
24. Heitmeyer CL, Jeffords RD, Labaw BG. Automated consistency checking of requirements specifications. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology, 1996; 5(3): 231-261.
25. UML Proposal to the Object Management Group Version 1.1, Rational Corporation. September 1997. http://www.rational.com/uml/
26. Frank! PG. Weyuker EJ. A formal analysis of the fault detecting ability of testing methods. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 1993: 19(3): 202-213.
27. Leveson NG, Heimdahl MPE, Hildreth H. Reese JD. Requirements specification for process-control systems. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. 1994; 30(9): 684-707.
28. Kesten Y, Pnueli A. Timed and hybrid statecharts and their textual representation. In Proceedings of Formal Techniques in Real-Time and Fault-Tolerant Systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol.571. Springer Verlag, 1992; 591-620.