From Temporal Models to Property-based Testing

Abstract

Abstract:This paper presents a framework to apply property-based testing (PBT) on top of temporal formal models. The aim of this work is to help software engineers to understand temporal models that are presented formally and to make use of the advantages of formal methods: the core time-based constructs of a formal method are schematically translated to the BeSpaceD extension of the Scala programming language. This allows us to have an executable Scala code that corresponds to the formal model, as well as to perform PBT of the models functionality. To model temporal properties of the systems, in the current work we focus on two formal languages, TLA+ and Focus ST

Formal FocusST Specification of CAN

“…Spatio-temporal models for formal analysis and property-based testing were presented in [1,2] by Alzahrani et al The authors aimed to to apply propertybased testing on Focus ST and TLA models with temporal properties.…”

(Auto)Focus approaches and their applications: A systematic review

“…Spatio-temporal models for formal analysis and property-based testing were presented in [1,2] by Alzahrani et al The authors aimed to to apply property-based testing on Focus ST and TLA models with temporal properties.…”

“…The research on the Focus-related approaches is an active topic. The most resent related works were presented by Alzahrani et al [2], where aims was to apply property-based testing on formal models with temporal properties, and by Kanav and Aravantinos [36], introducing the modular transformation from AF3 to the nuXmv symbolic model checker. As over the last 25 years many theoretical and applies work was conducted within the Focus approach, an overview of existing work is required.…”

Application of Property-based Testing Tools for Metamorphic Testing

“…reverse (reverse x) = x In the case of functional oracle-based testing, we would need to identify the equivalence partitions (the sets of inputs that have to be handled equivalently as they have to provide the same type of output but with possibly different values), and then specify at least one test case for each partition, or use boundary values in partitions that are ranges. Thus, for reverse function this could be an empty list [] and some nonempty list, e.g, [1,2,3], i.e., our test cases would be reverse…”

“…In contrast to this approach, in PBT the checks take place on the return value of the function under test, instead of checking values "hard-coded" in the test cases such as [] and [1,2,3]. That is, the input to the function under test would be automatically generated and the library chooses random values for testing rather than the tester specifying particular values.…”