2011
DOI: 10.1109/tse.2010.68
View full text |Buy / Rent full text
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abstract: Abstract-Conventional testing methods often fail to detect hidden flaws in complex embedded software such as device drivers or file systems. This deficiency incurs significant development and support/maintenance cost for the manufacturers. Model checking techniques have been proposed to compensate for the weaknesses of conventional testing methods through exhaustive analyses. Whereas conventional model checkers require manual effort to create an abstract target model, modern software model checkers remove this… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

1
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 50 publications
(11 reference statements)
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Furthermore, the possibility of application of model checkers for automated program testing is receiving increasing attention in the literature; see, for instance, [1,3,9,[11][12][13][14]. The strongest point of model checking is its capacity for the fully automated generation of test suites (see, for instance, [3]); on the other hand, some drawbacks resulting from the use of model checkers in test case generation are discussed in [9], originating in the fact that software model checking is not in a fully mature state yet.…”
Section: Overview Of the Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Furthermore, the possibility of application of model checkers for automated program testing is receiving increasing attention in the literature; see, for instance, [1,3,9,[11][12][13][14]. The strongest point of model checking is its capacity for the fully automated generation of test suites (see, for instance, [3]); on the other hand, some drawbacks resulting from the use of model checkers in test case generation are discussed in [9], originating in the fact that software model checking is not in a fully mature state yet.…”
Section: Overview Of the Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A slightly different approach, where the model checker is used directly for unit testing, is presented in [13]. Finally, the authors of [14] provide a comparative study of applying different model checkers to component testing, from the viewpoint of a real-world industrial project.…”
Section: Overview Of the Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…2. Such a representation of assume is not new (see, for example, [8]); however, its support is conditioned namely by the flexible repre sentation of the program control flow.…”
Section: Program Representationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Blast failed to detect the error and raised false alarms due to its limitations on handling bitwise operators and nested data structures. CBMC detected this error in 12 minutes with consuming 3 Gbyte of memory on average (details of the experiments can be found in [11]). In these analyses, however, we found that both Blast and CBMC had limitations for complex embedded C programs.…”
Section: Bml and Lld Layersmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, concrete applications of such techniques can guide new research directions to solve practical limitations observed in the studies. In this paper, we share our experience of applying various tools of model checking, software model checking, and concolic testing to flash memory storage platform [9,11,10] and smartphone platform [12].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%