Test selection based on finite state models

Fujiwara, Susumu; Bochmann, Gregor von; Khendek, Ferhat; Amalou, Mokhtar; Ghedamsi, A.

doi:10.1109/32.87284

Cited by 510 publications

(366 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

291

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The two basic ideas of extending state covers and characterization sets can be similarly incorporated into other methods for deterministic machines, such as the UIOv-method [VCI89], the Wp-method [FBK91] and the methods based on harmonized state identifiers [Petr91], [LPB94b], which rely on the reset in the implementations. These ideas can also be used to improve the fault coverage of tests produced by a number of VIO-based methods [SiLe89], [YPB93] which yield a single test sequence.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Handling redundant and additional states in protocol testing

Petrenko

Higashino²,

Kaji³

1996

Protocol Test Systems VIII

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper addresses the problem of conformance testing of protocols modeled by FSMs with redundant states. Redundant states appear in an FSM which may be nonminimal or nonconnected. The existing test derivation methods usually are not directly applicable to these machines. In this paper, we show that they can be adjusted to cover this class of FSMs and that the traditional assumption on the minimality of machines is not necessary. Another problem with redundant states is that they can cause the appearance of additional states in protocol implementations whose guaranteed detection requires tests of an exponential length. This paper proposes techniques for deriving tests for FSMs with redundant or additional states such that a high fault coverage is achieved while maintaining an acceptable test suite length. The effectiveness of the proposed methods has been evaluated in an experimental way using a benchmark protocol.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…11I(W)1 = n. 1I(W) is an equivalence partition of A [Gi1l62]. If A is reduced, then we have the traditional notion of the characterization set, as used for example, in [Koha78], [Vasi73], [Chow78], [FBK91].…”

Section: -Complete Test Suitesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Handling redundant and additional states in protocol testing

Petrenko

Higashino²,

Kaji³

1996

Protocol Test Systems VIII

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The reliability of this assum ption is the tester's responsibility. In this respect, one may think of exploiting symmetry as a structured way of test case selection [13,4] for systems too large to be tested exhaustively, where at least some subautom ata are tested thoroughly. This paper is not the first to deal with symmetry in protocol testing.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploiting Symmetry in Protocol Testing

Romijn

Springintveld

1998

IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Test generation and execution are often hampered by the large state spaces of the systems involved. In automata (or transition system) based test algorithms, taking advantage of symmetry in the behavior of specification and implementation may substantially reduce the amount of tests. We present a framework for describing and exploiting symmetries in black box test derivation methods based on finite state machines (FSMs). An algorithm is presented that, for a given symmetry relation on the traces of an FSM, computes a subautomaton that characterizes the FSM up to symmetry. This machinery is applied to Chow's classical W-method for test derivation. Finally, we focus on symmetries defined in terms of repeating patterns.

show abstract

“…Particularly, on average, the ratio of the length of the test suites derived using the proposed method over the length of corresponding suites derived using the HIS method is 0.66 (0.55) when the number of states of an implementation equals to (is greater than) the number of states of the specification. These ratios are almost independent of the size of specifications.Many FSM-based test derivation methods have been developed for conformance testing of communication protocols and other reactive systems [2,3,10,12,14,15,17] [1,6,13,16]. In [2,3,10,14,15,17] testing methods, one usually assumes that not only the specification, but also the implementation can be modeled as a deterministic FSM, while in [7,8] the specification and the implementation are modeled as non-deterministic FSMs (NFSMs).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In [2,3,10,14,15,17] testing methods, one usually assumes that not only the specification, but also the implementation can be modeled as a deterministic FSM, while in [7,8] the specification and the implementation are modeled as non-deterministic FSMs (NFSMs). If the behavior of a (deterministic/nondeterministic) implementation FSM is different than the specified behavior, the implementation contains a fault.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

An Improved Conformance Testing Method

Dorofeeva

El-Fakih

Yevtushenko

2005

Formal Techniques for Networked and Distributed Systems - FORTE 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In this paper, we present a novel conformance test suite derivation method. Similar to the HIS method, our method uses harmonized state identifiers for state identification and transition checking and can be applied to any reduced possibly partial deterministic or nondeterministic specification FSM. However, in contrast with the HIS method, in the proposed method appropriate state identifiers are selected on-the-fly (for transition checking) in order to shorten the length of the obtained test suite. Application examples and experimental results are provided. These results show that the proposed method generates shorter test suites than the HIS method. Particularly, on average, the ratio of the length of the test suites derived using the proposed method over the length of corresponding suites derived using the HIS method is 0.66 (0.55) when the number of states of an implementation equals to (is greater than) the number of states of the specification. These ratios are almost independent of the size of specifications.Many FSM-based test derivation methods have been developed for conformance testing of communication protocols and other reactive systems [2,3,10,12,14,15,17] [1,6,13,16]. In [2,3,10,14,15,17] testing methods, one usually assumes that not only the specification, but also the implementation can be modeled as a deterministic FSM, while in [7,8] the specification and the implementation are modeled as non-deterministic FSMs (NFSMs). If the behavior of a (deterministic/nondeterministic) implementation FSM is different than the specified behavior, the implementation contains a fault.The above methods, each provides the following fault coverage guarantee: If the specification can be modeled by a (reduced) FSM with n states and if a corresponding implementation can be modeled by an FSM with at most m states, where m is larger or equal to n, then a test suite can be derived by the method (for this given m) and the implementation passes this test suite if and only if it conforms (i.e. is equivalent) to the specification. A test suite is called m-complete [11] if it detects any nonconforming implementation with at most m states. Guessing the bound of m is an intuitive process based on the knowledge of a specification, the class of implementations which have to be tested for conformance and their interior structure [1]. All of the above methods assume that a reliable reset is available for each

show abstract

Test selection based on finite state models

Cited by 510 publications

References 12 publications

Handling redundant and additional states in protocol testing

Handling redundant and additional states in protocol testing

Exploiting Symmetry in Protocol Testing

An Improved Conformance Testing Method

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About