1. Mid Point Presentation Shared Test Case Project By Team Guardians

2. Agenda  Introduction  The Problem  What we have done so far  Project status  Risks  Reflections  Plan for the fall semester

3. The Guardians team Dilip Narayanan Gaurav Jalan Nithya Janarthanan

4. Our mentors The Mentors said…. Studio projects are like a box of chocolates, you never know what you’re gonna get…. Eduardo Miranda, Associate Teaching Professor, ISR Vijay Sai, SEI

5.  Client Jason Weighley, Rail Control Systems, Bombardier Transportation  External Consultants Prof. Anthony Tomasic Frederick Pfisterer

6. FAT Testing Division V&V Testing Division FAT Test Document V&V Test Case Document I see a lot of overlap. If only I could identify the common test cases !!! The Problem

7. Are there any test cases that are similar to the one I am going to write now ? Match Found Match not Found I don’t have to write a new test case. I have to write a new test case. This reduces costs. FAT V&V

8. Project Overview  Customer Goals: To help Bombardier testing division to identify at least 20% of the common test cases between their test groups  Academic Goals: To formalize the BT Test Case information in an efficiently searchable and retrievable manner

9. Project Plan  Approve Milestone plan with Eduardo and attach here, with milestones achieved in green, slipped in red and others in yellow.

10. Milestone plan

11. Milestone plan Contd... M10 Complete examination and Approval of 274 test cases 5 th October, 2009

12. Why two tracks  CTCI track: For our domain learning To reduce customer’s risk by ensuring critical common test cases are delivered on schedule  TCCS track: To provide a scalable solution that can be used for other test cases To meet our learning objectives

13. CTCI Status

14. CTCI Status - 2

15. Tester enters the use case details The following test cases are similar 1.Test case 1 2.Test Case 2 Common Test Case Identification System Hierarchical organization of domain data Repository of Test cases Testing Domain FATWheelBrakesV&VWheel

16. Test Case Comparison System - Updates  Technical Research – Identification of suitable approaches Literature Review Mentor Meetings Meetings with Subject Matter Experts – Prof. Anthony Tomasic –Frederick Pfisterer

17. Identified areas of Research  Areas of Research Natural Language Processing –Text Processing Systems Vector space models (Lucene) Ontology(Protégé) Hybrid Approach

18. Identification of suitable approaches Identify the Technology usage context and Evaluation goals Develop Model Problem Plan the Evaluation Analyze model problems against technology usage context Is technology a good fit ? yes No Modify Technology or Context Process for Approach Evaluation

19. Top 3 Risks Serial No. Risk Mitigation Strategy 1 Customer Unavailability Scheduled meeting with customer in one week's advance. Negotiating the time period of the customer meeting. 2 Research and learning activity not resulting in a concrete results Separate Learning Plan is created, exclusively for the learning activities. 3Not Finding any approach to formalize the test cases Meet with domain specialists from the Clients side to get more insight into the testing process and also scheduled meetings with technology experts.

20. Reflections - What went wrong ×Busy Customer ×Lack of Clarity of project Scope ×No Roles and Responsibilities ×Lack of a proper Process for each activity ×Ineffective Meetings ×Activity based planning

21. Reflections (What went well) Identified alternate points of contacts with the customer Identified alternate points of contacts with the customer Fixing up the next customer meeting at the end of the current meeting Fixing up the next customer meeting at the end of the current meeting Process for each of the activities Process for each of the activities Meeting Common test case comparison Learning and Research activities Meeting process Meeting process  Buffer time = 15% of total duration  Following the time boxing of the agenda items  Ideas list (in addition to the action items)  Scribe uses a shared Google doc and projects it

22. Lessons Learnt  Deadlines for the tasks  Sending across a deliverable on its deadline irrespective of the status of completion  Well- defined roles and responsibilities is important  Importance of having a Macro Plan

23. Plan for the Fall Semester Completion of Common test case Identification Verification and validation of the selected approach to provide the solution for identifying common test cases Technical Evaluation Report

24. Questions for the mentors, etc.  Do we have anything for mentors?

25.  Questions for us?

26. Backup slides

27. How we are tracking  G thinks that this slide can be removed. Or if not, at least put it up in bkup slides.  - for ctci i think v dont need to say how v track cuz its too trivial  - v can say something on how we are tracking tccs

28. Processes (we shud delete this)  D and G agreed to remove this slide. Need N’s opinion.  brief and generic overview of some of our processes – I don’t think this is reqd as we don’t really have any other processes except for CTCI and for Meetings  CTCI process we shud put in the bkup slides.

29. CTCI Process  I’m not sure if this is reqd even for bkup  Explain manual comparision diagrammatically, trying to de- emphasize the manual aspect of this process

30. Backup slides

32. Project Overview – Current Scenario

33. 33 Slide Title to go here Subheading (first level text) Bullet 1 (second level text) –Bullet 2 Bullet 3 – Bullet 4

34. 34 The Colours

35. 35 Picture slide Subheading (first level text) Bullet 1 (second level text) –Bullet 2 Bullet 3 – Bullet 4

36. 36 Example of suggested chart formatting Delete categories / series as necessary

37. 37 Examples of suggested formatting styles Column heading Row headingData Row headingData Row headingData Text box With shadow Text box With shadow