Verdict Functions in Testing with a Fault Domain or Test Hypotheses

ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology

Volumn 18, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 1-19

  Hierons, Robert M ^a  

^a BRUNEL UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

fault domains; test hypotheses; Test verdicts; Verification

Indexed keywords

SPECIFICATION LANGUAGES;

ALGEBRAIC SPECIFICATION LANGUAGES; DATA TYPE; FAULT DOMAINS; NON-DETERMINISTIC FINITE STATE MACHINE; STATE-BASED TESTING; TEST CASE; TEST EFFECTIVENESS; TEST RUNS;

TESTING;

EID: 84996526120     PISSN: 1049331X     EISSN: 15577392     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1145/1538942.1538944     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Bernot, G., Gaudel, M.-C., and Marre, B. 1991. Software testing-based on formal specification: A theory and a tool. Softw. Eng. J. 6, 387-405
2. Bidoit, M. and Mosses, P. 2003. CASL User Manual: Introduction to Using the Common Algebraic Specification Language. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2900. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany
3. Bouge, L., Choquet, N., Fibourg, L., and Gaudel, M.-C. 1986. Test sets generation from algebraic specifications using logic programming. J. Syst. Softw. 6, 4, 343-360
4. Chow, T. S. 1978. Testing software design modelled by finite state machines. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 4, 178-187
5. Gaudel, M. C. 1995. Testing can be formal too. In Proceedings of the 6th International Joint Conference CAAP/FASE Theory and Practice of Software Development (TAPSOFT'95). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 915. Springer, Berlin, Germany, 82-96
6. Goguen, J. A. and Malcolm, G. 2000. Software Engineering with OBJ: Algebraic Specifications in Action. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dorchecht, The Netherlands
7. Goguen, J. A. and Tardo, J. J. 1979. An introduction to OBJ: A language for writing and testing formal algebraic specifications. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Specifications of Reliable Software. 170-189
8. Gold, E. M. 1978. Complexity of automaton identification from given data. Infora. Contr. 37, 302-320
9. Hennie, F. C. 1964. Fault-detecting experiments for sequential circuits. In Proceedings of the 5th Annual Symposium on Switching Circuit Theory and Logical Design (Princeton). 95-110
10. Hierons, R. M. 1998. Adaptive testing of a deterministic implementation against a nondeter-mistic finite state machine. Comput. J. 41, 5, 349-355
11. Hierons, R. M. 2004. Testing from a nondeterministic finite state machine using adaptive state counting. IEEE Trans. Comput. 53, 10, 1330-1342
12. Hierons, R. M. and Ural, H. 2006. Optimizing the length of checking sequences. IEEE Trans. Comput. 55, 5, 618-629
13. Inan, K. and Ural, H. 1999. Efficient checking sequences for testing finite state machines. Inform. Softw. Techn. 41, 11-12, 799-812
14. Luo, G., Petrenko, A., and G. V. Bochmann, 1994a. Selecting test sequences for partially-specified nondeterministic finite state machines. In Proceedings of the 7th IFIP Workshop on Protocol Test Systems. Chapman and Hall, London, U.K., 95-110
15. Luo, G. L., G. V. Bochmann, and Petrenko, A. 1994b. Test selection based on communicating nondeterministic finite state machines using a generalized Wp-method. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 20, 2, 149-161
16. Moore, E. P. 1956. Gedanken-experiments. In Automata Studies, C. Shannon and J. McCarthy, Eds. Princeton University Press, Princeton
17. Mosses, P. D. 2004. CASL Reference Manual: The Complete Documentation of the Common Algebraic Specification Language. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2960. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany
18. Petrenko, A. and Yevtushenko, N. 2005. Testing from partial deterministic FSM specifications. IEEE Trans. Comput. 54, 9, 1154-1165
19. Petrenko, A., Yevtushenko, N., Lebedev, A., and Das, A. 1994. Nondeterministic state machines in protocol conformance testing. In Proceedings of Protocol Test Systems, VI (C-19). Elsevier Science (North-Holland), Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 363-378
20. Petrenko, A., Yevtushenko, N., and G. V. Bochmann, 1996. Testing deterministic implementations from nondeterministic FSM specifications. In Proceedings of the 9th IFIP TC6/WG6.1 International Workshop on Testing of Communicating Systems. Chapman and Hall, London, U.K., 125-141
21. Pickin, S., Jard, C., Jeron, T., Jezequel, J.-M., and Traon, Y. L. 2007. Test synthesis from UML models of distributed software. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 33, 4, 252-268
22. Rezaki, A. and Ural, H. 1995. Construction of checking sequences based on characterization sets. Comput. Commun. 18, 12, 911-920
23. Rodriguez, I., Merayo, M. G., and Ntjinez, M. 2006. A logic for assessing sets of heterogeneous testing hypotheses. In Proceedings of the 18th IFIP TC6/WG6.1 International Conference on Testing of Communicating Systems (TestCom 2006). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3964. Springer, Berlin, Germany, 39-54
24. Ural, H., Wu, X., and Zhang, F. 1997. Cn minimizing the lengths of checking sequences. IEEE Trans. Comput. 46, 1, 93-99
25. Yevtushenko, N. and Petrenko, A. 1990. Synthesis of test experiments in some classes of automata. Automat. Contr. Comput. Sci. 4, 4, 50-55
26. Yevtushenko, N. V., Lebedev, A. V., and Petrenko, A. F. 1991. on checking experiments with nondeterministic automata. Automat. Contr. Comput. Sci. 6, 81-85
27. Zander, J., Dai, Z. R., Schieferdecker, I., and Din, G. 2005. From U2TP models to executable tests with TTCN-3: An approach to model driven testing. In Proceedings of the 17th IFIP TC6/WG 6.1 International Conference on Testing of Communicating Systems (TestCom 2005). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3502. Springer, Berlin, Germany, 289-303