Automated gui testing guided by usage profiles

Brooks, Penelope A.; Memon, Atif M.

doi:10.1145/1321631.1321681

Cited by 75 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Alsmadi [1] proposes to abstract away from recorded interaction sessions to a higher level of abstraction. Brooks et al [2] actually implement such an approach. They collect usage profiles, generate a probabilistic model of application usage, and then generate GUI test cases from that model.…”

Section: Replaying User Interactionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Automating performance testing of interactive Java applications

Jovic

Adamoli

Zaparanuks

et al. 2010

Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on Automation of Software Test

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interactive applications with graphical user interfaces are prevalent in today's environment: Everybody with access to any kind of computer constantly uses them. A significant body of prior work has devised approaches for automating the functional testing of such applications. However, no such work exists for automatically testing their performance. Performance testing imposes additional requirements upon GUI test automation tools: the tools have to be able to replay complex interactive sessions, and they have to avoid perturbing the application's performance. We study the feasibility of using five Java GUI capture & replay tools for GUI performance test automation. Besides confirming the severity of the previously known GUI element identification problem, we also identify a related problem, the temporal synchronization problem, which is of increasing importance for GUI applications that use timer-driven activity. We find that most of the tools we study have severe limitations when used for recording and replaying realistic sessions of real-world Java applications, and that all of them suffer from the temporal synchronization problem. However, we find that the most reliable tool, Pounder, causes only limited perturbation, and thus can be used to automate performance testing. Besides the significance of our findings to GUI performance testing, the results are also relevant to capture & replay-based functional GUI test automation approaches.

show abstract

Section: Replaying User Interactionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Automating performance testing of interactive Java applications

Jovic

Adamoli

Zaparanuks

et al. 2010

Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on Automation of Software Test

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Assuming that executing one test case takes 10 seconds, all test cases will be finally executed in about 764 days on a single machine. Even for applications of small size, such as TerpWord, the number of test cases generated using only the EFG tends to become prohibitively large [12,55]. Therefore, it is crucial to find a model that helps to identify and generate relevant sequences of events that can serve as test cases for the user interface of an application.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trends in Model-based GUI Testing

Arlt

Bertolini²,

Pahl

et al. 2012

Advances in Computers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter gives an overview of the recent advances in GUI testing. Considering the increasing popularity and fast software development cycles (e.g., desktop and mobile applications), GUI testing gains more importance as it allows us to verify the behavior of a system from the user's perspective. Thus, it can quickly uncover relevant bugs, which a user could face.Traditional capture-replay GUI testing approaches do not meet the demands of developers anymore. Therefore, there is an increasing research activity in modelbased GUI testing, where the user interaction behavior is simulated using a graphbased model. In the following, we outline different graphical notations to describe feasible user interactions, and methods to generate and execute test cases from these models. We discuss the benefits and limitations of the state-of-the-art in GUI testing research and give a brief outlook about new trends and possibilities to improve the GUI testing automation.

show abstract

“…For instance, generation of system test cases can take advantage of usage profiles to be more effective [22]. Unfortunately good usage profiles are not always available.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

AutoBlackTest: Automatic Black-Box Testing of Interactive Applications

Mariani

Pezzè

Riganelli

et al. 2012

2012 IEEE Fifth International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Automatic test case generation is a key ingredient of an efficient and cost-effective software verification process. In this paper we focus on testing applications that interact with the users through a GUI, and present AutoBlackTest, a technique to automatically generate test cases at the system level. AutoBlackTest uses reinforcement learning, in particular Q-Learning, to learn how to interact with the application under test and stimulate its functionalities. The empirical results show that AutoBlackTest can execute a relevant portion of the code of the application under test, and can reveal previously unknown problems by working at the system level and interacting only through the GUI.

show abstract

Automated gui testing guided by usage profiles

Cited by 75 publications

References 22 publications

Automating performance testing of interactive Java applications

Automating performance testing of interactive Java applications

Trends in Model-based GUI Testing

AutoBlackTest: Automatic Black-Box Testing of Interactive Applications

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About