One evaluation of model-based testing and its automation

Model-based testing relies on behavior models for the generation of model traces: input and expected output - test cases - for an implementation. We use the case study of an automotive network controller to assess different test suites in terms of error detection, model coverage, and implementation coverage. Some of these suites were generated automatically with and without models, purely at random, and with dedicated functional test selection criteria. Other suites were derived manually, with and without the model at hand. Both automatically and manually derived model-based test suites detected significantly more requirements errors than hand-crafted test suites that were directly derived from the requirements. The number of detected programming errors did not depend on the use of models. Automatically generated model-based test suites detected as many errors as hand-crafted model-based suites with the same number of tests. A sixfold increase in the number of model-based tests led to an 11% increase in detected errors

SmartUnit: Empirical Evaluations for Automated Unit Testing of Embedded Software in Industry

In this paper, we aim at the automated unit coverage-based testing for embedded software. To achieve the goal, by analyzing the industrial requirements and our previous work on automated unit testing tool CAUT, we rebuild a new tool, SmartUnit, to solve the engineering requirements that take place in our partner companies. SmartUnit is a dynamic symbolic execution implementation, which supports statement, branch, boundary value and MC/DC coverage. SmartUnit has been used to test more than one million lines of code in real projects. For confidentiality motives, we select three in-house real projects for the empirical evaluations. We also carry out our evaluations on two open source database projects, SQLite and PostgreSQL, to test the scalability of our tool since the scale of the embedded software project is mostly not large, 5K-50K lines of code on average. From our experimental results, in general, more than 90% of functions in commercial embedded software achieve 100% statement, branch, MC/DC coverage, more than 80% of functions in SQLite achieve 100% MC/DC coverage, and more than 60% of functions in PostgreSQL achieve 100% MC/DC coverage. Moreover, SmartUnit is able to find the runtime exceptions at the unit testing level. We also have reported exceptions like array index out of bounds and divided-by-zero in SQLite. Furthermore, we analyze the reasons of low coverage in automated unit testing in our setting and give a survey on the situation of manual unit testing with respect to automated unit testing in industry.Comment: In Proceedings of 40th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice Track, Gothenburg, Sweden, May 27-June 3, 2018 (ICSE-SEIP '18), 10 page

JWalk: a tool for lazy, systematic testing of java classes by design introspection and user interaction

Popular software testing tools, such as JUnit, allow frequent retesting of modified code; yet the manually created test scripts are often seriously incomplete. A unit-testing tool called JWalk has therefore been developed to address the need for systematic unit testing within the context of agile methods. The tool operates directly on the compiled code for Java classes and uses a new lazy method for inducing the changing design of a class on the fly. This is achieved partly through introspection, using Java’s reflection capability, and partly through interaction with the user, constructing and saving test oracles on the fly. Predictive rules reduce the number of oracle values that must be confirmed by the tester. Without human intervention, JWalk performs bounded exhaustive exploration of the class’s method protocols and may be directed to explore the space of algebraic constructions, or the intended design state-space of the tested class. With some human interaction, JWalk performs up to the equivalent of fully automated state-based testing, from a specification that was acquired incrementally

A Survey on Software Testing Techniques using Genetic Algorithm

The overall aim of the software industry is to ensure delivery of high quality software to the end user. To ensure high quality software, it is required to test software. Testing ensures that software meets user specifications and requirements. However, the field of software testing has a number of underlying issues like effective generation of test cases, prioritisation of test cases etc which need to be tackled. These issues demand on effort, time and cost of the testing. Different techniques and methodologies have been proposed for taking care of these issues. Use of evolutionary algorithms for automatic test generation has been an area of interest for many researchers. Genetic Algorithm (GA) is one such form of evolutionary algorithms. In this research paper, we present a survey of GA approach for addressing the various issues encountered during software testing.Comment: 13 Page

Rule-based Test Generation with Mind Maps

This paper introduces basic concepts of rule based test generation with mind maps, and reports experiences learned from industrial application of this technique in the domain of smart card testing by Giesecke & Devrient GmbH over the last years. It describes the formalization of test selection criteria used by our test generator, our test generation architecture and test generation framework.Comment: In Proceedings MBT 2012, arXiv:1202.582

Development of a framework for automated systematic testing of safety-critical embedded systems

“This material is presented to ensure timely dissemination of scholarly and technical work. Copyright and all rights therein are retained by authors or by other copyright holders. All persons copying this information are expected to adhere to the terms and constraints invoked by each author's copyright. In most cases, these works may not be reposted without the explicit permission of the copyright holder." “Copyright IEEE. Personal use of this material is permitted. However, permission to reprint/republish this material for advertising or promotional purposes or for creating new collective works for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or to reuse any copyrighted component of this work in other works must be obtained from the IEEE.”In this paper we introduce the development of a framework for testing safety-critical embedded systems based on the concepts of model-based testing. In model-based testing the test cases are derived from a model of the system under test. In our approach the model is an automaton model that is automatically extracted from the C-source code of the system under test. Beside random test data generation the test case generation uses formal methods, in detail model checking techniques. To find appropriate test cases we use the requirements defined in the system specification. To cover further execution paths we developed an additional, to our best knowledge, novel method based on special structural coverage criteria. We present preliminary results on the model extraction using a concrete industrial case study from the automotive domain

Synthesis of Parametric Programs using Genetic Programming and Model Checking

Formal methods apply algorithms based on mathematical principles to enhance the reliability of systems. It would only be natural to try to progress from verification, model checking or testing a system against its formal specification into constructing it automatically. Classical algorithmic synthesis theory provides interesting algorithms but also alarming high complexity and undecidability results. The use of genetic programming, in combination with model checking and testing, provides a powerful heuristic to synthesize programs. The method is not completely automatic, as it is fine tuned by a user that sets up the specification and parameters. It also does not guarantee to always succeed and converge towards a solution that satisfies all the required properties. However, we applied it successfully on quite nontrivial examples and managed to find solutions to hard programming challenges, as well as to improve and to correct code. We describe here several versions of our method for synthesizing sequential and concurrent systems.Comment: In Proceedings INFINITY 2013, arXiv:1402.661