Model Interchange Testing: a Process and a Case Study

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Diagram Definition: an Overview Third OMG/Eclipse Symposium 25 March 2012 Maged Elaasar, Senior Software Engineer.
Advertisements

Requirements Engineering Processes – 2
Software Requirements
Project Management with VIVA PPM Tool (Project Portfolio Management)
Andrea Maurino Web Service Design Methodology Batini, De Paoli, Maurino, Grega, Comerio WP2-WP3 Roma 24/11/2005.
Chapter 13: The Systems Perspective of a DSS
13 September 2012 SDMX Technical Working Group1 Report of the SDMX Technical Standards Working Group SDMX Expert Group Meeting, Paris, September 2012.
Cultural Heritage in REGional NETworks REGNET. October 2001Project presentation REGNET 2 Definition of supported Business Functions BUSINESS PROCESS MODELLING.
HL7 V2 Implementation Guide Authoring Tool Proposal
1 MSRATF Update to TSS (Modeling SPS and RAS Ad Hoc Task Force) Scope of Work Approval January 25, 2013 Joe Seabrook Puget Sound Energy.
European Commission Directorate General Economic and Financial Affairs New question on capacity utilisation in services - state of play and way forward.
Language Specification using Metamodelling Joachim Fischer Humboldt University Berlin LAB Workshop Geneva
ADQ Implementation Avitech’s Approach and Experience
© 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
Insert image here © SPEC-Soft SAVINGS AND EXPERTISE FOR YOUR PLANT PFS-Suite Life-cycle Tools For Process Automation PFS-Suite TM.
Configuration management
Configuration Management
Karl-Heinz Kühnlein Conquest 2009: Experiences with model centric Testing in Standard-based Medical IT Environments Test Management Aspects.
Chapter 5 – Enterprise Analysis
Testing Workflow Purpose
Galit Haim, Ya'akov Gal, Sarit Kraus and Michele J. Gelfand A Cultural Sensitive Agent for Human-Computer Negotiation 1.
1 ST PHASE: TEAM LEAD, MODEL INSTANTIATION DESIGNER, SCRIBE 2 ND PHASE: MODEL INSTANTIATION DESIGNER, SCRIBE 3 RD PHASE: TEAM LEAD, MODEL INSTANTIATION.
J Garza Consulting and Associates 1 Pilot Car Escort Certification Model For State Implementation.
Use Case Diagrams.
Software Requirements
Software Processes.
Prescriptive Process models
Cliquez pour modifier le style du titre 1 Model-driven demonstration applied to Packaging models (MOIMS IPR) Model-driven demonstration prepared by CNES.
Chapter 2 Entity-Relationship Data Modeling: Tools and Techniques
UML an overview.
Week 1.
10-1 © Prentice Hall, 2004 Chapter 10: Selecting the Best Alternative Design Strategy Plus Project Management Concepts.
Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2009 Operating System Concepts – 8 th Edition, Chapter 14: Protection.
The PLASTIC Model to HUTN transformation tool UDA.
THE HARMONIZED MODEL John R. Herring Convener Harmonized Model Maintenance Group 1.
1 CIS224 Software Projects: Software Engineering and Research Methods Lecture 11 Brief introduction to the UML Specification (Based on UML Superstructure.
Chapter 4 Quality Assurance in Context
TENCompetence Assessment Model, Related Tools and their Evaluation Milen Petrov, Adelina Aleksieva-Petrova, Krassen Stefanov, Judith Schoonenboom, Yongwu.
Micro Manager Performance Tracking System Rashed Hossain Sponsor: Nizam Ahmed Director of Finance and Administration Market One Enterprises.
Version Enterprise Architect Redefines Modeling in 2006 An Agile and Scalable modeling solution Provides Full Lifecycle.
HL7 UK 2003 (c) Abies Ltd Modelling Clinical Information Using UML Tim Benson Abies Ltd
Systems Modeling Language ™ Overview Cris Kobryn and Sandy Friedenthal SysML Partners ( October 2003.
From Validating Models to Validating Systems Peter Denno University of Maryland ISR Colloquium 1.
Faculty of Informatics and Information Technologies Slovak University of Technology Peter Kajsa and Ľubomír Majtás Design.
Diagram Definition A Case Study with the UML Class Diagram MoDELS 2011, Wellington, NZ By Maged Elaasar 1,2 (Presenter) and Yvan Labiche.
Design Management: a Collabortive Design Solution ECMFA 2013 Montpellier, France Maged Elaasar (Presenter) Senior Software Engineer, IBM
Abstract We present two Model Driven Engineering (MDE) tools, namely the Eclipse Modeling Framework (EMF) and Umple. We identify the structure and characteristic.
Requirements as Usecases Capturing the REQUIREMENT ANALYSIS DESIGN IMPLEMENTATION TEST.
XASTRO-2 Overview Presentation CCSDS SAWG Athens Meeting 12 th April 2005.
Dr. Darius Silingas | No Magic, Inc. Domain-Specific Profiles for Your UML Tool Building DSL Environments with MagicDraw UML.
® A Proposed UML Profile For EXPRESS David Price Seattle ISO STEP Meeting October 2004.
October 1st 2015 Alexis Fouché 1, Florian Noyrit 1, Sébastien Gérard 1, Maged Elaasar 2 SYSTEMATIC GENERATION OF STANDARD COMPLIANT TOOL SUPPORT OF DIAGRAMMATIC.
UML Course Instructor: Rizwana Noor. Overview  Modeling  What is UML?  Why UML?  UML Diagrams  Use Case  Components  Relationships  Notations.
® IBM Software Group A Metamodeling Approach to Pattern Specification Maged Elaasar 1,2, Dr. Lionel Briand 1, Dr. Yvan Labiche 1 1 Carleton University,
Standards Stephen J. Mellor Chief Scientist. 2 Why Standards? n Increases choice for customers n Increases the size of the market n Promotes competition.
Using UML, Patterns, and Java Object-Oriented Software Engineering Chapter 2, Modeling with UML: UML 2 Metamodel Note to Instructor: The material in this.
Whole Test Suite Generation. Abstract Not all bugs lead to program crashes, and not always is there a formal specification to check the correctness of.
Viewpoint Modeling and Model-Based Media Generation for Systems Engineers Automatic View and Document Generation for Scalable Model- Based Engineering.
What makes for good standards in Apprenticeships? Jeremy Benson – Executive Director for Vocational Qualifications Bryan Horne - Associate Director, Standards.
Language = Syntax + Semantics + Vocabulary
Interoperability Demonstration Objectives
Report: Model Interchange Testing OMG Unified Profile for DoDAF and MODAF (UPDM), Version 2.* (17 June 2013) OMG UPDM Group & OMG Model Interchange Working.
Configuration Management
SysML 2.0 Formalism: Requirement Benefits, Use Cases, and Potential Language Architectures Formalism WG December 6, 2016.
SysML v2 Formalism: Requirements & Benefits
Proposed SysML v2 Submission Plan
Chapter 2, Modeling with UML, Part 4 UML 2 Metamodel
Modelling Clinical Information Using UML
Copyright © by Object Management Group.
Copyright © 2015, 2012, 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Presentation transcript:

Model Interchange Testing: a Process and a Case Study Maged Elaasar, Yvan Labiche ECMFA 2012, Copenhagen, Denmark IBM Canada Ltd. Carleton University Ottawa, Canada

Motivation Issues due to: Modeling tool A Modeling tool B Model interchange import export Tao: Requirements or Prerequisites? Probably not to have “we assume the following” in the slide, instead you can simply say that our methodology requires:…. This part is also easy to trigger questions. Be prepared. For example, what is the impact if one of the requirements is not satisfied; how practical these requirements are, especially the last two…Any automation can be proposed here? The reason for this assumption is that we try to reduce redundancy between postconditions of the caller and callee, which may result in duplicate DU pairs and would complicate the algorithm for deriving test paths. Also, postconditions can be specified at different levels of precision: More detailed postconditions would contain more data flow information that yields more tests. Issues due to: Ambiguities in modeling standards Ambiguities in interchange standard Lack of verification of tool interchange capabilities

Outcome OMG members (tool vendors and users) formed a Model Interchange Working Group (MIWG) Objective: to test and improve model interchange between tools. This presentation: report on the activities of the MIWG a verification testing process case study: interchange of UML and SysML models Tao: Requirements or Prerequisites? Probably not to have “we assume the following” in the slide, instead you can simply say that our methodology requires:…. This part is also easy to trigger questions. Be prepared. For example, what is the impact if one of the requirements is not satisfied; how practical these requirements are, especially the last two…Any automation can be proposed here? The reason for this assumption is that we try to reduce redundancy between postconditions of the caller and callee, which may result in duplicate DU pairs and would complicate the algorithm for deriving test paths. Also, postconditions can be specified at different levels of precision: More detailed postconditions would contain more data flow information that yields more tests.

Verification testing process Process: defining and executing model interchange test cases Test case: testing an “area” of a modeling language. Large area: e.g., UML Sequence Diagrams Small area: e.g., specific types of Actions in UML Activity Diagrams Execution: defining a reference model exporting it from one tool importing the result into another tool. Tao: Requirements or Prerequisites? Probably not to have “we assume the following” in the slide, instead you can simply say that our methodology requires:…. This part is also easy to trigger questions. Be prepared. For example, what is the impact if one of the requirements is not satisfied; how practical these requirements are, especially the last two…Any automation can be proposed here? The reason for this assumption is that we try to reduce redundancy between postconditions of the caller and callee, which may result in duplicate DU pairs and would complicate the algorithm for deriving test paths. Also, postconditions can be specified at different levels of precision: More detailed postconditions would contain more data flow information that yields more tests.

Verification testing process (cont.) Tao: Requirements or Prerequisites? Probably not to have “we assume the following” in the slide, instead you can simply say that our methodology requires:…. This part is also easy to trigger questions. Be prepared. For example, what is the impact if one of the requirements is not satisfied; how practical these requirements are, especially the last two…Any automation can be proposed here? The reason for this assumption is that we try to reduce redundancy between postconditions of the caller and callee, which may result in duplicate DU pairs and would complicate the algorithm for deriving test paths. Also, postconditions can be specified at different levels of precision: More detailed postconditions would contain more data flow information that yields more tests. Implementer: resolves issues MIWG: e.g., issue when specifying and creating a test case Revision Task Force: e.g., identified ambiguity in standard Producer: e.g., tool does not support modeling feature, difference between exported model and reference model Consumer: e.g., tool does not import specific feature, difference between re-created diagram(s) and reference model MIWG: Defines test cases: To cover areas of modeling language that are deemed important tools should be able to interchange Experts a small exemplary reference model (image) Experts creates corresponding XMI file Tools generated + editing Producer (each one, for each test case): Manually re-creates model (from reference model image) Exports the model as XMI Exports diagram(s) as image(s) Compares exported XMI with reference one 4 roles: can be played by one or more parties MIWG: defines test cases Producer: creates and exports model Consumer: imports and compares model Implementer: resolves issues Consumer (each other one, for each produced XMI): Imports XMI model Manually re-creates diagram(s) Exports diagram(s) as image(s) for comparison purposes Exports model as XMI for comparison purposes (optional) Test oracle

Issue of scalability Assuming The process involves Plus: N tools T test case specifications (i.e., reference models) The process involves N exports for each of the T test cases, followed by N-1 imports for each export. Linear scalability of [T.N] on export, Polynomial scalability of [T.N.(N-1)] on import Import is partly manual: re-creating diagram(s) Plus: Standards evolve Tools evolve Test suite can be revised, extended Hinders scalability Tao: Requirements or Prerequisites? Probably not to have “we assume the following” in the slide, instead you can simply say that our methodology requires:…. This part is also easy to trigger questions. Be prepared. For example, what is the impact if one of the requirements is not satisfied; how practical these requirements are, especially the last two…Any automation can be proposed here? The reason for this assumption is that we try to reduce redundancy between postconditions of the caller and callee, which may result in duplicate DU pairs and would complicate the algorithm for deriving test paths. Also, postconditions can be specified at different levels of precision: More detailed postconditions would contain more data flow information that yields more tests.

Verification testing process (revised) The MIWG agreed that: validating the exported models by comparing them to the reference models testing the import of the reference models should be sufficient. Automated XMI file validation (compliance to standards) and comparisons with reference model Tao: Requirements or Prerequisites? Probably not to have “we assume the following” in the slide, instead you can simply say that our methodology requires:…. This part is also easy to trigger questions. Be prepared. For example, what is the impact if one of the requirements is not satisfied; how practical these requirements are, especially the last two…Any automation can be proposed here? The reason for this assumption is that we try to reduce redundancy between postconditions of the caller and callee, which may result in duplicate DU pairs and would complicate the algorithm for deriving test paths. Also, postconditions can be specified at different levels of precision: More detailed postconditions would contain more data flow information that yields more tests.

Case Study Modeling languages selected: UML, SysML Test suite: Market pressure, popularity Test suite: 16 test cases (3/4 for UML) 59% of UML metaclasses 55% of SysML stereotypes Six tools Tao: Requirements or Prerequisites? Probably not to have “we assume the following” in the slide, instead you can simply say that our methodology requires:…. This part is also easy to trigger questions. Be prepared. For example, what is the impact if one of the requirements is not satisfied; how practical these requirements are, especially the last two…Any automation can be proposed here? The reason for this assumption is that we try to reduce redundancy between postconditions of the caller and callee, which may result in duplicate DU pairs and would complicate the algorithm for deriving test paths. Also, postconditions can be specified at different levels of precision: More detailed postconditions would contain more data flow information that yields more tests.

Case Study Execution 30 months 1st phase (initial process): 21 months 96 (16x6) exports and 480 (16x6x5) imports Re-exports/re-imports necessary as standards, test cases and/or tools were being revised 2nd phase (revised process): 9 months 192 (16x2x6) imports Tao: Requirements or Prerequisites? Probably not to have “we assume the following” in the slide, instead you can simply say that our methodology requires:…. This part is also easy to trigger questions. Be prepared. For example, what is the impact if one of the requirements is not satisfied; how practical these requirements are, especially the last two…Any automation can be proposed here? The reason for this assumption is that we try to reduce redundancy between postconditions of the caller and callee, which may result in duplicate DU pairs and would complicate the algorithm for deriving test paths. Also, postconditions can be specified at different levels of precision: More detailed postconditions would contain more data flow information that yields more tests.

Case Study--Results 1st phase helped uncover major issues tools’ support of the UML metamodel and SysML profile which hindered the successful interchange of models. Showed tools export extra information, or non-standard information Not always expected during import MIWG proposed that tools use the XMI:exporter tag to specify their tool name during export Such that import can be customized Showed tools do not offer consistent support for standards E.g., default values for multiplicity of UML typed elements Tao: Requirements or Prerequisites? Probably not to have “we assume the following” in the slide, instead you can simply say that our methodology requires:…. This part is also easy to trigger questions. Be prepared. For example, what is the impact if one of the requirements is not satisfied; how practical these requirements are, especially the last two…Any automation can be proposed here? The reason for this assumption is that we try to reduce redundancy between postconditions of the caller and callee, which may result in duplicate DU pairs and would complicate the algorithm for deriving test paths. Also, postconditions can be specified at different levels of precision: More detailed postconditions would contain more data flow information that yields more tests.

Case Study--Results (cont.) 2nd phase issues/bugs reported by tools for each test case for their first (dashed line) export for their last (solid line) export (test case exports 3-4 times on average due to bug fixes) Overall improvement Some remaining issues mainly due to ambiguities in standards Tao: Requirements or Prerequisites? Probably not to have “we assume the following” in the slide, instead you can simply say that our methodology requires:…. This part is also easy to trigger questions. Be prepared. For example, what is the impact if one of the requirements is not satisfied; how practical these requirements are, especially the last two…Any automation can be proposed here? The reason for this assumption is that we try to reduce redundancy between postconditions of the caller and callee, which may result in duplicate DU pairs and would complicate the algorithm for deriving test paths. Also, postconditions can be specified at different levels of precision: More detailed postconditions would contain more data flow information that yields more tests.

Conclusions MIWG has defined and validated a rigorous incremental model interchange testing process Process used in a case study to assess UML and SysML model interchange between six tools Tools’ conformance to the standards increased by 20% Extending test suite to remaining parts of UML metamodel and SysML profile Applying process to other modeling languages Tao: Requirements or Prerequisites? Probably not to have “we assume the following” in the slide, instead you can simply say that our methodology requires:…. This part is also easy to trigger questions. Be prepared. For example, what is the impact if one of the requirements is not satisfied; how practical these requirements are, especially the last two…Any automation can be proposed here? The reason for this assumption is that we try to reduce redundancy between postconditions of the caller and callee, which may result in duplicate DU pairs and would complicate the algorithm for deriving test paths. Also, postconditions can be specified at different levels of precision: More detailed postconditions would contain more data flow information that yields more tests.

Questions? 13