Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Testing Robots Using CSP

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Tests and Proofs (TAP 2019)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 11823))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

This paper presents a technique for automatic generation of tests for robotic systems based on a domain-specific notation called RoboChart. This is a UML-like diagrammatic notation that embeds a component model suitable for robotic systems, and supports the definition of behavioural models using enriched state machines that can feature time properties. The formal semantics of RoboChart is given using tock-CSP, a discrete-time variant of the process algebra CSP. In this paper, we use the example of a simple drone to illustrate an approach to generate tests from RoboChart models using a mutation tool called Wodel. From mutated models, tests are generated using the CSP model checker FDR. The testing theory of CSP justifies the soundness of the tests.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    https://www.cs.york.ac.uk/robostar/.

  2. 2.

    https://www.eclipse.org/Xtext/.

References

  1. Aichernig, B., Jifeng, H.: Mutation testing in UTP. Formal Aspects Comput. 21(1–2), 33–64 (2008)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Aichernig, B.K.: Mutation testing in the refinement calculus. Formal Aspects Comput. 15(2), 280–295 (2003)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Aichernig, B.K.: Model-based mutation testing of reactive systems. In: Liu, Z., Woodcock, J., Zhu, H. (eds.) Theories of Programming and Formal Methods. LNCS, vol. 8051, pp. 23–36. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39698-4_2

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Aichernig, B.K., Hörmaier, K., Lorber, F.: Debugging with timed automata mutations. In: Bondavalli, A., Di Giandomenico, F. (eds.) SAFECOMP 2014. LNCS, vol. 8666, pp. 49–64. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10506-2_4

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Aichernig, B.K., Jöbstl, E., TiranStefan, S.: Model-based mutation testing via symbolic refinement checking. Sci. Comput. Program. 97(P4), 383–404 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Aichernig, B.K., Lorber, F., Ničković, D.: Time for mutants—model-based mutation testing with timed automata. In: Veanes, M., Viganò, L. (eds.) TAP 2013. LNCS, vol. 7942, pp. 20–38. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38916-0_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Alberto, A., Cavalcanti, A.L.C., Gaudel, M.-C., Simao, A.: Formal mutation testing for Circus. Inf. Softw. Technol. 81, 131–153 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Ammann, P.E., Black, P.E., Majurski, W.: Using model checking to generate tests from specifications. In: 2nd International Conference on Formal Engineering Methods, pp. 46–54. IEEE (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Brillout, A., et al.: Mutation-based test case generation for simulink models. In: de Boer, F.S., Bonsangue, M.M., Hallerstede, S., Leuschel, M. (eds.) FMCO 2009. LNCS, vol. 6286, pp. 208–227. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-17071-3_11

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Budd, T.A., Gopal, A.S.: Program testing by specification mutation. Comput. Lang. 10(1), 63–73 (1985)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Cavalcanti, A., Gaudel, M.-C.: Testing for refinement in CSP. In: Butler, M., Hinchey, M.G., Larrondo-Petrie, M.M. (eds.) ICFEM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4789, pp. 151–170. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-76650-6_10

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Cavalcanti, A.L.C., Gaudel, M.-C.: Testing for refinement in Circus. Acta Informatica 48(2), 97–147 (2011)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Cavalcanti, A.L.C., Gaudel, M.-C., Hierons, R.M.: Conformance relations for distributed testing based on CSP. In: Wolff, B., Zaïdi, F. (eds.) ICTSS 2011. LNCS, vol. 7019, pp. 48–63. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-24580-0_5

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Cavalcanti, A.L.C., Hierons, R.M.: Testing with inputs and outputs in CSP. In: Cortellessa, V., Varró, D. (eds.) FASE 2013. LNCS, vol. 7793, pp. 359–374. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37057-1_26

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Cavalcanti, A.L.C., Hierons, R.M., Nogueira, S., Sampaio, A.C.A.: A suspension-trace semantics for CSP. In: International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Software Engineering, pp. 3–13 (2016). Invited paper

    Google Scholar 

  16. Cavalcanti, A., Miyazawa, A., Sampaio, A., Li, W., Ribeiro, P., Timmis, J.: Modelling and verification for swarm robotics. In: Furia, C.A., Winter, K. (eds.) IFM 2018. LNCS, vol. 11023, pp. 1–19. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98938-9_1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Cavalcanti, A.L.C., et al.: Verified simulation for robotics. Sci. Comput. Program. 174, 1–37 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Cavalcanti, A.L.C., Sampaio, A.C.A., Woodcock, J.C.P.: A refinement strategy for Circus. Formal Aspects Comput. 15(2–3), 146–181 (2003)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Delamaro, M.E., Maldonado, J.C., Mathur, A.P.: Interface mutation: an approach for integration testing. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 27(3), 228–247 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Conserva Filho, M.S., Marinho, R., Mota, A., Woodcock, J.: Analysing RoboChart with probabilities. In: Massoni, T., Mousavi, M.R. (eds.) SBMF 2018. LNCS, vol. 11254, pp. 198–214. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03044-5_13

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Foster, S., Baxter, J., Cavalcanti, A.L.C., Miyazawa, A., Woodcock, J.C.P.: Automating verification of state machines with reactive designs and Isabelle/UTP. In: Bae, K., Ölveczky, P.C. (eds.) FACS 2018. LNCS, vol. 11222, pp. 137–155. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02146-7_7

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. Fraser, G., Wotawa, F., Ammann, P.E.: Testing with model checkers: a survey. Softw. Test. Verif. Reliab. 19(3), 215–261 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Gibson-Robinson, T., Armstrong, P., Boulgakov, A., Roscoe, A.W.: FDR3—a modern refinement checker for CSP. In: Ábrahám, E., Havelund, K. (eds.) TACAS 2014. LNCS, vol. 8413, pp. 187–201. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-54862-8_13

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Gómez-Abajo, P., Guerra, E., de Lara, J.: Wodel: a domain-specific language for model mutation. In: Ossowski, S. (ed.) Proceedings of the 31st Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, Pisa, Italy, 4–8 April 2016, pp. 1968–1973. ACM (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Gómez-Abajo, P., Guerra, E., de Lara, J.: A domain-specific language for model mutation and its application to the automated generation of exercises. Comput. Lang. Syst. Struct. 49, 152–173 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Gómez-Abajo, P., Guerra, E., de Lara, J., Merayo, M.G.: A tool for domain-independent model mutation. Sci. Comput. Program. 163, 85–92 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Granda, M.F., Condori-Fernández, N., Vos, T.E.J., Pastor, O.: Mutation operators for UML class diagrams. In: Nurcan, S., Soffer, P., Bajec, M., Eder, J. (eds.) CAiSE 2016. LNCS, vol. 9694, pp. 325–341. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39696-5_20

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  28. Guan, J., Offutt, J.: A model-based testing technique for component-based real-time embedded systems. In: Eighth IEEE International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation, ICST 2015 Workshops, Graz, Austria, 13–17 April 2015, pp. 1–10. IEEE Computer Society (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Herzner, W., Schlick, R., Brandl, H., Wiessalla, J.: Towards fault-based generation of test cases for dependable embedded software. Softwaretechnik-Trends 31(3) (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Hierons, R.M., Merayo, M.G., Núñez, M.: Implementation relations and test generation for systems with distributed interfaces. Distrib. Comput. 25(1), 35–62 (2012)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  31. Hierons, R.M., Ural, H.: The effect of the distributed test architecture on the power of testing. Comput. J. 51(4), 497–510 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Hoare, C.A.R.: Programming: sorcery or science? IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 4 (1984)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Jia, Y., Harman, M.: An analysis and survey of the development of mutation testing. IEEE Softw. Eng. 37(5), 649–678 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Krenn, W., Aichernig, B.K.: Test case generation by contract mutation in Spec\(\#\). Electron. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 253(2), 71–86 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Larsen, K.G., Lorber, F., Nielsen, B., Nyman, U.: Mutation-based test-case generation with Ecdar. In: 2017 IEEE International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshops, ICST Workshops 2017, Tokyo, Japan, 13–17 March 2017, pp. 319–328. IEEE Computer Society (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Lorber, F., Larsen, K.G., Nielsen, B.: Model-based mutation testing of real-time systems via model checking. In: 2018 IEEE International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshops, ICST Workshops, Västerås, Sweden, 9–13 April 2018, pp. 59–68. IEEE Computer Society (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Miyazawa, A., Ribeiro, P., Li, W., Cavalcanti, A.L.C., Timmis, J.: Automatic property checking of robotic applications. In: IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp. 3869–3876 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Miyazawa, A., Ribeiro, P., Li, W., Cavalcanti, A.L.C., Timmis, J., Woodcock, J.C.P.: RoboChart: modelling and verification of the functional behaviour of robotic applications. Softw. Syst. Model. 18, 3097–3149 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Naylor, B., Read, M., Timmis, J., Tyrrell, A.: The Relay Chain: A Scalable Dynamic Communication link between an Exploratory Underwater Shoal and a Surface Vehicle (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Nilsson, R., Offutt, J.: Automated testing of timeliness: a case study. In: Zhu, H., Wong, W.E., Paradkar, A.M. (eds.) Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Automation of Software Test, AST 2007, Minneapolis, MN, USA, 26–26 May 2007, pp. 55–61. IEEE Computer Society (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  41. Nilsson, R., Offutt, J., Andler, S.F.: Mutation-based testing criteria for timeliness. In: Proceedings of the 28th International Computer Software and Applications Conference (COMPSAC 2004), Design and Assessment of Trustworthy Software-Based Systems, Hong Kong, China, 27–30 September 2004, pp. 306–311. IEEE Computer Society (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Nilsson, R., Offutt, J., Mellin, J.: Test case generation for mutation-based testing of timeliness. Electr. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 164(4), 97–114 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Papadakis, M., Malevris, N.: Searching and generating test inputs for mutation testing. SpringerPlus 2(1), 1–12 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Park, H.W., Ramezani, A., Grizzle, J.W.: A finite-state machine for accommodating unexpected large ground-height variations in bipedal robot walking. IEEE Trans. Rob. 29(2), 331–345 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Rabbath, C.A.: A finite-state machine for collaborative airlift with a formation of unmanned air vehicles. J. Intell. Rob. Syst. 70(1), 233–253 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Roscoe, A.W.: Understanding Concurrent Systems. Texts in Computer Science. Springer, London (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84882-258-0

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  47. Siavashi, F., Truscan, D., Vain, J.: Vulnerability assessment of web services with model-based mutation testing. In: 2018 IEEE International Conference on Software Quality, Reliability and Security, QRS 2018, Lisbon, Portugal, 16–20 July 2018, pp. 301–312 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  48. Srivatanakul, T., Clark, J.A., Stepney, S., Polack, F.: Challenging formal specifications by mutation: a CSP security example. In: 10th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference, pp. 340–350. IEEE Press (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  49. Swain, S.K., Mohapatra, D.P., Mall, R.: Test case generation based on state and activity models. J. Object Technol. 9(5), 1–27 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Tomic, T., et al.: Toward a fully autonomous UAV: research platform for indoor and outdoor urban search and rescue. IEEE Rob. Autom. Mag. 19(3), 46–56 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Trab, M.S.A., Counsell, S., Hierons, R.M.: Specification mutation analysis for validating timed testing approaches based on timed automata. In: 36th Annual IEEE Computer Software and Applications Conference, COMPSAC 2012, Izmir, Turkey, 16–20 July 2012, pp. 660–669 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  52. University of York. RoboChart Reference Manual. www.cs.york.ac.uk/circus/RoboCalc/robotool/

    Google Scholar 

  53. Vega, J.J.O., Perrouin, G., Amrani, M., Schobbens, P.-Y.: Model-based mutation operators for timed systems: a taxonomy and research agenda. In: 2018 IEEE International Conference on Software Quality, Reliability and Security, QRS 2018, Lisbon, Portugal, 16–20 July 2018, pp. 325–332 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  54. Wimmel, G., Jürjens, J.: Specification-based test generation for security-critical systems using mutations. In: George, C., Miao, H. (eds.) ICFEM 2002. LNCS, vol. 2495, pp. 471–482. Springer, Heidelberg (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-36103-0_48

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work is funded by the EPSRC grants EP/M025756/1 and EP/R025479/1, and by the Royal Academy of Engineering. We have benefited from discussions with Pablo Gómez-Abajo and Mercedes Merayo with regards to Wodel implementation, and Sharar Ahmadi, Alvaro Miyazawa, and Augusto Sampaio with regards to our example and its simulation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, University of York, York, YO10 5GH, UK

    Ana Cavalcanti & James Baxter

  2. Department of Computer Science, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, S1 4DP, UK

    Robert M. Hierons & Raluca Lefticaru

Authors
  1. Ana Cavalcanti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. James Baxter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Robert M. Hierons
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Raluca Lefticaru
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ana Cavalcanti .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany

    Dirk Beyer

  2. University of Paris-Sud, Orsay, France

    Chantal Keller

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Cavalcanti, A., Baxter, J., Hierons, R.M., Lefticaru, R. (2019). Testing Robots Using CSP. In: Beyer, D., Keller, C. (eds) Tests and Proofs. TAP 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11823. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31157-5_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31157-5_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-31156-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-31157-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation