An FSM based GUI test automation model

Miao, Yuan; Yang, Xinzheng

doi:10.1109/icarcv.2010.5707766

Cited by 23 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Another method used for modeling GUIs is to specify them as a set of operations acting on objects [35]. In another work, Miao and Yang [37] treated GUI as a series of interfaces, where each interface is regarded as a state. They modeled a GUI state as a quadruple (W, O, P, V), where W represents windows, O objects, P properties, and V values, respectively.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Input Contract Testing of Graphical User Interfaces

Tuğlular

Belli

Linschulte³

2016

Int. J. Soft. Eng. Knowl. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

User inputs are critical for the security, safety, and reliability of software systems. This paper proposes a new concept called user input contracts, which is an integral part of a design-bycontract supplemented development process, and a model-based testing approach to detect violations of user input contracts. The approach generates test cases from an input contract integrated with graph-based model of user interface speci¯cation and applies them to the system under consideration. The paper presents a proof-of-concept tool that has been developed and used to validate the approach by experiments. The experiments are conducted on a web-based system for marketing tourist services to analyze input robustness of system under consideration with respect to user input contracts.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Input Contract Testing of Graphical User Interfaces

Tuğlular

Belli

Linschulte³

2016

Int. J. Soft. Eng. Knowl. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The abstract states of a state machine are used to verify the concrete states of the corresponding GUI application during the test case execution [1]. Reverse engineered state-based models are used for testing GUI applications in various approaches, e.g., GUI Driver [8] and GuiTam [9] for Java GUI applications, Crawljax [10] and DynaRIA [11] for rich internet applications (RIAs), and AndroidRipper [12] for Android applications.…”

Section: A Automating the Construction Of Gui Models For Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Making GUI Testing Practical: Bridging the Gaps

Aho

Suarez

Memon

et al. 2015

2015 12th International Conference on Information Technology - New Generations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effort and expertise required for manually crafting the models for model-based testing (MBT) is a major obstacle slowing down its industrial adoption. For implemented and executable systems, there are approaches to automate some part or even the whole process of creating the models for MBT. Recently, using extracted models for testing graphical user interface (GUI) applications has been a popular area of research, but most of the proposed approaches have limitations and restrictions on what can be modeled, and the software industry has not adopted these approaches. In this paper, we try to identify the gaps between the academic approaches and tools and industrial requirements hindering the industrial adoption, and try to suggest practical solutions to the identified gaps.

show abstract

“…Finite state machines () are one of the most popular used models for software design and software testing. Miao et al proposed an finite state machine–based approach (called GUI test automation model), with the goal to automate all the tests of the EFG‐based approach, aiming to provide more automation concerns and thus solving limitations of the EFG approach. They indicate that EFGs are not able to model certain scenarios where GUI objects are modified dynamically: (1) changing the visibility of a GUI object, which depends on another objects' state (checkbox), via code will lead to an event being undefined; and (2) toggling of the visibility property value of a panel can cause several events to be uncovered or concealed.…”

Section: State Of the Artmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pattern‐based GUI testing: Bridging the gap between design and quality assurance

Moreira

Paiva

Nabuco

et al. 2017

Software Testing Verif & Rel

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Software systems with a graphical user interface (GUI) front end are typically designed using user interface (UI) Patterns, which describe generic solutions (with multiple possible implementations) for recurrent GUI design problems. However, existing testing techniques do not take advantage of this fact to test GUIs more efficiently. In this paper, we present a new pattern-based GUI testing (PBGT) approach that formalizes the notion of UI Test Patterns, which are generic test strategies to test UI patterns over their different implementations. The PBGT approach is evaluated via 2 case studies. The first study involves 2 fielded Web application subjects; findings show that PBGT is both practical and useful, as testing teams were able to find real bugs in a reasonable time interval. The second study allows deeper analysis by studying software subjects seeded with artificial faults; the findings show that PBGT is more effective than a manual model-based test case generation approach.

show abstract

An FSM based GUI test automation model

Cited by 23 publications

References 12 publications

Input Contract Testing of Graphical User Interfaces

Input Contract Testing of Graphical User Interfaces

Making GUI Testing Practical: Bridging the Gaps

Pattern‐based GUI testing: Bridging the gap between design and quality assurance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About