An Automated Test Generation Process from UML Models to TTCN-3 Jens R. Calamé

IFM 2005 (Doctoral Symposium), Eindhoven2 Our Test Generation Process Abstract System Specification System Specification (formal) Test Purpose TGV System Specification (e.g. UML) Abstraction Test Case Generation Parameterizable Test Case (TTCN-3) Rule System for Data Selection TTCN-3 Generation Constraint Generation Abstract Test Case

IFM 2005 (Doctoral Symposium), Eindhoven3 Abstraction Motivation: Test Generation with TGV is based on enumerative techniques  suffers from state-space explosion Finite state-space by data abstraction System abstraction on specification-level: –Replace all input values by one constant chaos ( * ) –Propagate this * through the system –Transform conditions based on * to nondeterministic choice  Abstracted system is an over-approximation of original system

IFM 2005 (Doctoral Symposium), Eindhoven4 Generation of Data Selection Rules Given: –Abstract test case (control flow information + internal data) –Original specification (data dependencies) Result: (generated Prolog implementation) –Rules, representing ADT functions of the original specification (meta language) –Rule system based on specification: one rule for each transition in original system, containing Conditions Assignments (internally or from input actions, resp.) –Test oracle based on abstract test case (query to rule system) Invocation of all selected actions as a conjunction

IFM 2005 (Doctoral Symposium), Eindhoven5 Test Execution 1.Pre-solve one trace to pass statically (skip internal  -steps) 2.Execute this trace until the SUT leaves it 3.Try to find a trace to pass  solve and execute it 4.If no trace to pass: Try to find a trace to inconc  solve it 5.If no trace to inconc: set test verdict fail PASS 01 INCONC !initPin(x00)!initBalance(x10) !getPin(x20) ?pinCorrect ?pinInCorrect ?lowBalance !getAmount(x40)!getBalance ?Balance(x50) !getAmount(x60) ?Money(x70) ?eatCard

IFM 2005 (Doctoral Symposium), Eindhoven6 Future Work (Theoretical Part) Proof of completeness of the presented approach –If there is a failure in the SUT – is there a test case that finds it?  -steps handling not yet fully satisfying –In blackbox testing:  -steps are skipped –However: for online constraint-solving  -steps contain necessary information (e.g. internal assignments) –Possible solution: assignment collection in first visible action after sequence of  -steps (loops?) Theoretical foundation of suspension handling (quiescence,  -loops again)

IFM 2005 (Doctoral Symposium), Eindhoven7 Conclusion Actual status: – Data abstraction algorithm is implemented for µCRL –Parameterization constraint generation is implemented –Whole test generation process is applied to CEPS (but: not yet test execution) –Generation of TTCN-3 test cases ongoing work Future work: –Correct handling of  -steps in blackbox-testing –Handling of suspension traces in the SUT –Proof that a complete set of test cases is generated –Test data selection and test case parameterization –Formalization of UML-Models for test generation

IFM 2005 (Doctoral Symposium), Eindhoven8