Model-based testing

ABSTRACT

Model-based testing has become increasingly popular in recent years. Major reasons include (1) the need for quality assurance for increasingly complex systems, (2) the emerging model-centric development paradigm (e.g., UML and MDA) with its seemingly direct connection to testing, and (3) the advent of test-centered development methodologies.Model-based testing relies on execution traces of behavior models. They are used as test cases for an implementation: input and expected output. This complements the ideas of model-driven testing. The latter uses static models to derive test drivers to automate test execution. This assumes the existence of test cases, and is, like the particular intricacies of OO testing, not in the focus of this tutorial.We cover major methodological and technological issues: the business case of model-based testing within model-based development, the need for abstraction and inverse concretization, test selection, and test case generation. We (1) discuss different scenarios of model-based testing, (2) present common abstractions when building models, and their consequences for testing, (3) explain how to use functional, structural, and stochastic test selection criteria, and (4) describe today's test generation technology.We provide both practical guidance and a discussion of the state-of-the-art. Potentials of model-based testing in practical applications and future research are highlighted.

REFERENCES

• 1: Robert V. Binder, Testing object-oriented systems: models, patterns, and tools, Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, MA, 1999
• 2: M. Broy, B. Jonsson, J.-P. Katoen, M. Leucker, and A. Pretschner (eds.). Model-Based Testing. LNCS. Springer, 2005. To appear.
• 3: John D. Musa, Software Reliability Engineering: More Reliable Software Faster and Cheaper, Authorhouse, 2004
• 4: Glenford J. Myers, Art of Software Testing, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, NY, 1979
• 5: A. Pretschner , O. Slotosch , E. Aiglstorfer , S. Kriebel, Model-based testing for real: The inhouse card case study, International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer (STTT), v.5 n.2, p.140-157, March 2004 [doi>10.1007/s10009-003-0128-3]
• 6: Hong Zhu , Patrick A. V. Hall , John H. R. May, Software unit test coverage and adequacy, ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), v.29 n.4, p.366-427, Dec. 1997 [doi>10.1145/267580.267590]

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
      D.2.5 Testing and Debugging

Additional Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
      D.2.2 Design Tools and Techniques

General Terms:
Verification

Keywords:
coverage, development processes, model-based development