Automated comparison of state-based software models in terms of their language and structure

ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology

Volumn 22, Issue 2, 2013, Pages

  Walkinshaw, Neil ^a   Bogdanov, Kirill ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEICESTER   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Accuracy; Comparison; Labeled transition systems

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; BINARY CLASSIFICATION; COMPARISON; INFERENCE TECHNIQUES; LABELED TRANSITION SYSTEMS; MODEL-DRIVEN SOFTWARE ENGINEERINGS; STATES AND TRANSITIONS; VERIFICATION AND TESTING;

TESTING;

SOFTWARE ENGINEERING;

EID: 84876138196     PISSN: 1049331X     EISSN: 15577392     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1145/2430545.2430549     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Biermann, A. and Feldman, J. 1972. On the synthesis of finite-state machines from samples of their behavior. IEEE Trans. Comput. 21, 592-597.
2. Bogdanov, K. and Walkinshaw, N. 2009. Computing the structural difference between state-based models. In Proceedings of the 16th IEEE Working Conference on Reverse Engineering (WCRE).
3. Bogdanov, K., Holcombe, M., Ipate, F., Seed, L., and Vanak, S. 2006. Testing methods for X-Machines: A review. Form. Asp. Comput. Sci. 18, 3-30. (Pubitemid 43234748)
4. Börger, E. 2005. Abstract state machines and high-level system design and analysis. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 336, 2-3, 205-207. (Pubitemid 40612389)
5. Bunke, H. 1997. On a relation between graph edit distance and maximum common subgraph. Patt. Recog. Lett. 18, 8, 689-694. (Pubitemid 127411238)
6. Cheng, K. and Krishnakumar, A. 1993. Automatic functional test generation using the extended finite state machine model. In Proceedings of the 30th ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference. 86-91. (Pubitemid 23673283)
7. Chow, T. 1978. Testing software design modelled by finite state machines. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 4, 3, 178-187. (Pubitemid 8602457)
8. Clarke, E., Grumberg, O., and Peled, D. 1999. Model Checking. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
9. Cook, J. and Wolf, A. 1998. Discovering models of software processes from event-based data. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Meth. 7, 3, 215-249. (Pubitemid 128658170)
10. Cook, J. and Wolf, A. 1999. Software process validation: Quantitatively measuring the correspondence of a process to a model.ACMTrans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 8, 2, 147-176. (Pubitemid 129533752)
11. Davis, T. 2004. Algorithm 832: Umfpack v4.3\-an unsymmetric-pattern multifrontal method. ACM Trans. Math. Softw. 30, 2, 196-199.
12. Fujiwara, S., von Bochmann, G., Khendek, F., Amalou, M., and Ghedamsi, A. 1991. Test selection based on finite state models. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 17, 6, 591-603. (Pubitemid 21675162)
13. Gill, A. 1962. Introduction to the Theory of Finite State Machines. McGraw-Hill.
14. Harel, D. and Naamad, A. 1996. The STATEMATE Semantics of Statecharts. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Meth. 5, 4, 293-333.
15. Hopcroft, J., Motwani, R., and Ullman, J. 2007. Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages, and Computa-tion 3rd Ed. Addison-Wesley
16. Kelter, U. and Schmidt, M. 2008. Comparing state machines. InProceedings of the Comparison and Versioning of Software Models (CVSM'08).
17. Kermorvant, C. and Dupont, P.2002. Stochastic grammatical inference with multinomial tests. In Grammatical Inference:Algorithms and Applications, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 2484, Springer-Verlag, 149-160.
18. Lang, K. 1992. Random DFA's can be approximately learned from sparse uniform examples. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Learning Theory (COLT'92). 45-52. (Pubitemid 23615481)
19. Lang, K., Pearlmutter, B., and Price, R. 1998. Results of the abbadingo one DFA learning competition and a new evidence-driven state merging algorithm. In Proceedings of the International Colloquium on GrammarInference (ICGI).vol. 1433, 1-12. (Pubitemid 128108889)
20. Laycock, G 1992. Formal specification and testing: A case study. Softw. Test., Verif Reliability 2, 1, 7-23.
21. Lee, D. and Yannakakis, M. 1996. Principles and methods of testing finite state machines - a survey. Proc. IEEE84, 1090-1126.
22. Leskovec, J., Kleinberg, J., and Faloutsos, C. 2007. Graph evolution: Densification and shrinking diameters. ACMTrans. Knowl. Disc. Data 1, 1.
23. Lo, D. and Khoo, S. 2006. QUARK: Empirical assessment of automaton-based specification miners. In Proceedings of the Working Conference on Reverse Engineering (WCRE'06). IEEE Computer Society 51-60. (Pubitemid 47514628)
24. Melnik, S., Garcia-Molina, H., andRahm, E. 2002. Similarityflooding: Aversatile graphmatchingalgorithm and its application to schema matching. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE'02) . (Best Student Paper award).
25. Needleman, S. and Wunsch, C. 1970. A general method applicable to the search of similarities in the amino acid sequence of two proteins. J. Molec. Biol. 48, 443-453.
26. Nejati, S., Sabetzadeh, M., Chechik, M., Easterbrook, S., and Zave, P. 2007. Matching and merging of state- charts specifications. InProceedings of the International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE'07). IEEE Computer Society, 54-64.
27. Pradel, M., Bichsel, P., and Gross, T. 2010.Aframeworkforthe evaluationofspecificationminers basedonfi-nite state machines. InProceedings of the International Conference on Software Maintenance (ICSM'10).
28. Quante, J. and Koschke, R. 2007. Dynamic protocol recovery. In Proceedings of the International Working Conference on Reverse Engineering (WCRE'07). 219-228.
29. Raymond, J., Gardiner, E., and Willett, P. 2002. RASCAL: Calculation of graph similarity using maximum common edge subgraphs. Comput. J. 45, 6, 631-644. (Pubitemid 35446242)
30. Rijsbergen, C. J. V. 1979. Information Retrieval. Butterworth-Heinemann, Newton, MA.
31. Rousseeuw, P., Ruts, I., and Tukey J. 1999. The bagplot: A bivariate boxplot.Amer. Stati. 53, 4, 382-387.
32. Sokolova, M. and Lapalme, G 2009. A systematic analysis of performance measures for classification tasks. Inf. Process. Manage. 45, 4, 427-437.
33. Sokolsky O., Kannan, S., and Lee, I. 2006. Simulation-based graph similarity In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems (TACAS'06). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3920, Springer, 426-440.
34. Sorrows, M. and Hirtle, S. 1999. The nature of landmarks for real and electronic spaces. In Spatial Informa-tion Theory - Cognitive and Computational Foundations of Geographic Information Science. Springer, Berlin, 37-50.
35. Vasilevskii, M. 1973. Failure diagnosis of automata. Cybernetics Syst. Anal.
36. Walkinshaw, N., Bogdanov, K., Holcombe, M., and Salahuddin, S. 2007. Reverse engineering state machines by interactive grammar inference. In Proceedings of the 14th IEEE International Working Conference on Reverse Engineering (WCRE).
37. Walkinshaw, N., Bogdanov, K., Holcombe, M., and Salahuddin, S. 2008a. Improving dynamic software anal-ysis by applying grammar inference principles. J. Softw. Maint. Evol.: Res. Prac.
38. Walkinshaw, N., Bogdanov, K., and Johnson, K. 2008b. Evaluation and comparison of inferred regular gram-mars. In Proceedings of the International Colloquium on Grammar Inference (ICGI).
39. Walkinshaw, N., Derrick, J., and Guo, Q. 2009. Iterative refinement of reverse-engineered models by model-based testing. In Proceedings of Formal Methods (FM'09). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5850, Springer, 305-320.
40. Walkinshaw, N., Bogdanov, K., Damas, C., Lambeau, B., and Dupont, P. 2010. A framework for the compet- itive evaluation of model inference techniques. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Model Inference in Testing (MIIT'10).
41. Weyuker, E. 1983. Assessing test data adequacy through program inference. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 5, 4, 641-655.
42. Whaley R. and Petitet, A. 2005. Minimizing development and maintenance costs in supporting persistently optimized BLAS. Software: Prac. Exper. 35, 2, 101-121. (Pubitemid 40184494)