On transforming model‐based tests into code: A systematic literature review

IF 1.5 4区 计算机科学 Q3 COMPUTER SCIENCE, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING Software Testing Verification & Reliability Pub Date : 2023-09-07 DOI:10.1002/stvr.1860
Fabiano C. Ferrari, Vinicius H. S. Durelli, Sten F. Andler, Jeff Offutt, Mehrdad Saadatmand, Nils Müllner
{"title":"On transforming model‐based tests into code: A systematic literature review","authors":"Fabiano C. Ferrari, Vinicius H. S. Durelli, Sten F. Andler, Jeff Offutt, Mehrdad Saadatmand, Nils Müllner","doi":"10.1002/stvr.1860","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Model‐based test design is increasingly being applied in practice and studied in research. Model‐based testing (MBT) exploits abstract models of the software behaviour to generate abstract tests, which are then transformed into concrete tests ready to run on the code. Given that abstract tests are designed to cover models but are run on code (after transformation), the effectiveness of MBT is dependent on whether model coverage also ensures coverage of key functional code. In this article, we investigate how MBT approaches generate tests from model specifications and how the coverage of tests designed strictly based on the model translates to code coverage. We used snowballing to conduct a systematic literature review. We started with three primary studies, which we refer to as the initial seeds. At the end of our search iterations, we analysed 30 studies that helped answer our research questions. More specifically, this article characterizes how test sets generated at the model level are mapped and applied to the source code level, discusses how tests are generated from the model specifications, analyses how the test coverage of models relates to the test coverage of the code when the same test set is executed and identifies the technologies and software development tasks that are on focus in the selected studies. Finally, we identify common characteristics and limitations that impact the research and practice of MBT: (i) some studies did not fully describe how tools transform abstract tests into concrete tests, (ii) some studies overlooked the computational cost of model‐based approaches and (iii) some studies found evidence that bears out a robust correlation between decision coverage at the model level and branch coverage at the code level. We also noted that most primary studies omitted essential details about the experiments.","PeriodicalId":49506,"journal":{"name":"Software Testing Verification & Reliability","volume":"54 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Software Testing Verification & Reliability","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/stvr.1860","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Model‐based test design is increasingly being applied in practice and studied in research. Model‐based testing (MBT) exploits abstract models of the software behaviour to generate abstract tests, which are then transformed into concrete tests ready to run on the code. Given that abstract tests are designed to cover models but are run on code (after transformation), the effectiveness of MBT is dependent on whether model coverage also ensures coverage of key functional code. In this article, we investigate how MBT approaches generate tests from model specifications and how the coverage of tests designed strictly based on the model translates to code coverage. We used snowballing to conduct a systematic literature review. We started with three primary studies, which we refer to as the initial seeds. At the end of our search iterations, we analysed 30 studies that helped answer our research questions. More specifically, this article characterizes how test sets generated at the model level are mapped and applied to the source code level, discusses how tests are generated from the model specifications, analyses how the test coverage of models relates to the test coverage of the code when the same test set is executed and identifies the technologies and software development tasks that are on focus in the selected studies. Finally, we identify common characteristics and limitations that impact the research and practice of MBT: (i) some studies did not fully describe how tools transform abstract tests into concrete tests, (ii) some studies overlooked the computational cost of model‐based approaches and (iii) some studies found evidence that bears out a robust correlation between decision coverage at the model level and branch coverage at the code level. We also noted that most primary studies omitted essential details about the experiments.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
关于将基于模型的测试转换为代码:系统的文献综述
基于模型的试验设计越来越多地应用于实践和研究中。基于模型的测试(MBT)利用软件行为的抽象模型来生成抽象测试,然后将其转换为准备在代码上运行的具体测试。假设抽象测试被设计为覆盖模型,但是在代码上运行(在转换之后),MBT的有效性依赖于模型覆盖是否也确保了关键功能代码的覆盖。在本文中,我们研究了MBT方法如何从模型规范中生成测试,以及严格基于模型设计的测试的覆盖率如何转换为代码覆盖率。我们用滚雪球法进行了系统的文献综述。我们从三个主要的研究开始,我们称之为最初的种子。在我们的搜索迭代结束时,我们分析了30项研究,这些研究有助于回答我们的研究问题。更具体地说,本文描述了在模型级别生成的测试集是如何映射并应用到源代码级别的,讨论了如何从模型规范生成测试,分析了当执行相同的测试集时,模型的测试覆盖率如何与代码的测试覆盖率相关,并确定了所选研究中关注的技术和软件开发任务。最后,我们确定了影响MBT研究和实践的共同特征和限制:(i)一些研究没有完全描述工具如何将抽象测试转换为具体测试,(ii)一些研究忽略了基于模型的方法的计算成本,(iii)一些研究发现了证据,证明模型级别的决策覆盖率和代码级别的分支覆盖率之间存在强大的相关性。我们还注意到,大多数初级研究忽略了实验的基本细节。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Software Testing Verification & Reliability
Software Testing Verification & Reliability 工程技术-计算机:软件工程
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal is the premier outlet for research results on the subjects of testing, verification and reliability. Readers will find useful research on issues pertaining to building better software and evaluating it. The journal is unique in its emphasis on theoretical foundations and applications to real-world software development. The balance of theory, empirical work, and practical applications provide readers with better techniques for testing, verifying and improving the reliability of software. The journal targets researchers, practitioners, educators and students that have a vested interest in results generated by high-quality testing, verification and reliability modeling and evaluation of software. Topics of special interest include, but are not limited to: -New criteria for software testing and verification -Application of existing software testing and verification techniques to new types of software, including web applications, web services, embedded software, aspect-oriented software, and software architectures -Model based testing -Formal verification techniques such as model-checking -Comparison of testing and verification techniques -Measurement of and metrics for testing, verification and reliability -Industrial experience with cutting edge techniques -Descriptions and evaluations of commercial and open-source software testing tools -Reliability modeling, measurement and application -Testing and verification of software security -Automated test data generation -Process issues and methods -Non-functional testing
期刊最新文献
Model‐based testing, test case prioritization and testing of virtual reality applications In vivo testing and integration of proving and testing Mutation testing optimisations using the Clang front‐end Semantic‐aware two‐phase test case prioritization for continuous integration Exploiting deep reinforcement learning and metamorphic testing to automatically test virtual reality applications
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1