Prioritization of test scenarios derived from UML activity diagram using path complexity

Kaur, Preeti; Bansal, Poonam; Sibal, Ritu

doi:10.1145/2381716.2381783

Cited by 14 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Each UML activity diagram selected for this study had different control structures. As a result, the selected four UML activity diagrams for the experiment were as follows i.e., ATM Withdraw activity diagram [27], Shipping Order System activity diagram [13], Buy Beverage from Vending Machine activity diagram [11], and Mileage Purchase Web Portal activity diagram [28].…”

Section: Define the Criteria To Select The Uml Activity Diagrammentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The unified modeling language (UML) is a standard model used to design object-oriented programming [4]. Several studies have employed a UML model to generate and prioritize test paths by converting activity diagram into a tree structure [11], or a graph structure [5,[12][13][14][15][16][17] and then generating the test paths. Some studies have converted a sequence diagram into a graph structure [18,19] and then generated test paths.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All the symbol weights affect the test path score [15,16]. The weight calculation of a control flow graph node derives from the numbers of incoming edges to the node multiplied by the count of outgoing edges from the node [13]. In the second group, the weights are assigned to the edges of the graph.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Third, the weights are assigned to both nodes and edges of a graph [11,22]. According to some reports, the symbols in UML activity diagram or in control flow graph were assigned weights as in [5,11,15,16] 2) weight=4, if the node was inter-depended activity [16] 3) weight=6, if the node was control node [16] Normal edge 1) weight=1 [12] 2) weight=2 [22] Edge passed the decision node 1) weight=total weight of all outgoing edges must be 1 [12] 2) based on 80/20 rule [22] edge weight=4 for the true edge of the decision node edge weight=1 for the false edge of the decision node Decision node 1) weight=2 [11,16] 2) weight=4 [5,15] Merge node 1) weight=2 [11] 2) weight=3 [5,15], Fork-join node 1) fork weight=2, join weight=2 [5,15] 2) fork weight=3, join weight=3 [11] 3) fork weight=5, join weight=3 [16] Final node  1) weight=0 [15] 1) sum of all edge weights, where the weights of the edges were assigned according to the type of edges (see Table 1) [12] Node and edge 1) sum of all node weights+sum of all edge weights, where the weights of the nodes were assigned according to the type of symbols (see Table 1) and the weights of the edges were assigned by the number of incoming dependencies of predecessor node multiplied by the number of outgoing dependencies of the successor node [11] 2) sum of all node weights+sum of all edge weights, where the weights of the nodes were assigned by using backward slices approach and the weights of the edges were assigned according to the type of edges (see Table 1) [22] Kaur et al [13] proposed the prioritization of test paths descended from UML activity diagram by using complexity of the path as follows. First, the activity diagram was transformed into a control flow graph.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Target-based test path prioritization for UML activity diagram using weight assignment methods

Sornkliang

Phetkaew

2021

IJECE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The benefit of exploratory testing and ad hoc testing by tester’s experience is that crucial bugs are found quickly. Regression testing and test case prioritization are important processes of software testing when software functions have been changed. We propose a test path prioritization method to generate a sequence of test paths that would match the testers’ interests and focuses on the target area of interest or on the changed area. We generate test paths form the activity diagrams and survey the test path prioritization from testers. We define node and edge weight to the symbols of activity diagrams by applying Time management, Pareto, Buffett, Binary, and Bipolar method. Then we propose a test path score equation to prioritize test paths. We also propose evaluation methods i.e., the difference and the similarity of test path prioritization to testers’ interests. Our proposed method had the least average of the difference and the most average of the similarity compare with the tester’s prioritization of test paths. The Bipolar method was the most suitable for assigning weights to match test path rank by the tester. Our proposed method also has given the affected path by changing area higher priority than the other test path.

show abstract

Section: Define the Criteria To Select The Uml Activity Diagrammentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Target-based test path prioritization for UML activity diagram using weight assignment methods

Sornkliang

Phetkaew

2021

IJECE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many approaches have made use of UML diagrams for prioritized test case generation. Preeti et al [15] discussed an approach for prioritizing test scenarios based on UML activity diagram. Test case prioritization is a very important aspect of regression…”

Section: Assigning Priority To Test Casesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Test case prioritization and distributed testing of object-oriented program

S¹,

Mathew²

2019

Turk J Elec Eng & Comp Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Software systems have increased in size and complexity. As a result, object-oriented programming (OOP) is increasingly being used in the development of such large and complex systems. Traditional procedural programming requires a design method that follows a sequential flow of control, which is difficult to follow in the case of large systems design. Thinking in terms of real-life objects and their interactions makes design easier in the case of OOP. However, OOP comes with its own set of disadvantages and testing is one of them. Testing of such systems requires much more effort and time. In our approach the program is analyzed to build a system dependence graph-based model. This model is analyzed for test script generation and to find state-save points within the program where the state of the program can be saved and reused for executing another test case. The test cases are prioritized looking at the structural complexity of the program. The distributed testing presented here is different from traditional distributed testing, where they address testing of web and distributed applications. The distributed architecture developed in this work enables testing of OOP in an efficient manner. The concept is implemented for Java programs as there is support for continuation.

show abstract