Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Automatic test cases generation from business process models

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Requirements Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Traditional test case generation approaches focus on design and implementation models while a large percentage of software errors are caused by the lack of understanding in the early phases. One of the most important models in the early phases of software development is business process model which closely resembles the real world and captures the requirements precisely. The aim of this paper is to present a model-based approach to automatically generate test cases from business process models. We first model business processes and convert them to state graphs. Then, the graphs are traversed and transformed to the input format of the “Spec explorer” tool that generates the test cases. Furthermore, we conduct a study to evaluate the impact of process characterizations on the performance of the proposed method.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. De Cleva Farto G, Endo AT (2015) Evaluating the model-based testing approach in the context of mobile applications. Electron Notes Theor Comput Sci 314:3–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Backlund A (2010) Utilizing statistics in a model-based testing process. Dissertation, Department of Information Technologies, Abo Akademi University

  3. Boghdady PN, Badr N, Hashem M, Tolba MF (2011) Test case generation and test data extraction techniques. Int J Electr Comput Sci (IJECS-IJENS) 11(03):87–94

    Google Scholar 

  4. Abdurazik A, Offutt J (2000) Using UML collaboration diagrams for static checking and test generation. In: International conference on the unified modeling language, pp 383–395

  5. Nam DH, Mousset EC, Levy DC (2006) Automating the testing of object behavior: a state chart-driven approach. In: Proceedings of world academy of science, engineering and technology, Helsinki, Finland

  6. Pretschner A, Philipps J (2005) 10 methodological issues in model-based testing. In: Model-based testing of reactive systems, pp 281–291

  7. El-Far IK, Whittaker JA (2001) Model-based software testing. In: Marciniak JJ (ed) Encyclopedia of software engineering. Wiley

  8. Badreddin O, Sturm A, Lethbridge TC (2014) Requirement traceability: a model-based approach. In: IEEE 4th international model-driven requirements engineering workshop (MoDRE), pp 87–91

  9. Alshazly AA, Elfatatry AM, Abougabal MS (2014) Detecting defects in software requirements specification. Alex Eng J 53(3):513–527

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Utting M, Pretschner A, Legeard B (2012) A taxonomy of model-based testing approaches. Softw Test Verif Reliab 22(5):297–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Parsa S, Amiri MJ, Ebrahimifard A, Arani MK (2016) Towards a goal-driven method for web service choreography validation. In: 2nd IEEE international conference on web research, pp 66–71

  12. De la Vera Gonzalez JL, & Diaz JS (2007) Business process-driven requirements engineering: a goal-based approach. In: Proceedings of the 8th workshop on business process modeling

  13. Yu ES (1997) Towards modelling and reasoning support for early-phase requirements engineering. In: Proceedings of the 3rd IEEE international symposium on requirements engineering, pp 226–235

  14. Ebrahimifard A, Amiri MJ, Arani MK, Parsa S (2016) Mapping BPMN 2.0 choreography to WS-CDL: a systematic method. J E Technol 7(1):1–23

    Google Scholar 

  15. Muehlen MZ, Indulska M, Kamp G (2007) Business process and business rule modeling: a representational analysis. In: Eleventh international IEEE EDOC workshop, pp 189–196

  16. Roser S, Bauer B (2005) A categorization of collaborative business process modeling techniques. In: 7th IEEE international conference on E-Commerce technology, pp 43–51

  17. Anand S, Burke EK, Chen TY, Clark J, Cohen MB, Grieskamp W, Harman M, Harrold MJ, McMinn P (2013) An orchestrated survey of methodologies for automated software test case generation. J Syst Softw 86(8):1978–2001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN), Version 2.0. OMG Specification, Object Management Group, August 2013

  19. Spec Explorer tool. http://research.microsoft.com/specexplorer, public release January 2005. Accessed 19 May 2018

  20. Mohalik S, Gadkari AA, Yeolekar A, Shashidhar KC, Ramesh S (2014) Automatic test case generation from Simulink/Stateflow models using model checking. Softw Test Verif Reliab 24(2):155–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Nayak A, Samanta D (2010) Automatic test data synthesis using UML sequence diagrams. J Object Technol 9(2):75–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Sarma M, Mall R (2007) Automatic test case generation from UML models. In: 10th IEEE international conference on information technology (ICIT), pp 196–201

  23. Winter M (1999) Quality assurance for object-oriented software, requirements engineering, and testing wrt requirements specification. Dissertation, University of Hagen

  24. Myers GJ, Corey S, Tom B (2011) The art of software testing. Wiley, London

    Google Scholar 

  25. Pechtanun K, Kansomkeat S (2012) Generation test case from UML activity diagram based on AC grammar. In: IEEE international conference on computer & information science (ICCIS), vol 2, pp 895–899

  26. Swain R, Panthi V, Behera PK, Mohapatra DP (2012) Automatic test case generation from UML state chart diagram. Int J Comput Appl 42(7):26–36

    Google Scholar 

  27. Bertolino A (2003) Software Testing Research and Practice. In: Börger E, Gargantini A, Riccobene E (eds) Abstract State Machines 2003. ASM 2003. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2589. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  28. Offutt J, Abdurazik A (1999) Generating Tests from UML Specifications. In: France R, Rumpe B (eds) «UML»’99 — The Unified Modeling Language. UML 1999. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1723. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  29. Kim YG, Hong HS, Bae DH, Cha SD (1999) Test cases generation from UML state diagram. IEEE Proc Softw 146:187–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Sokenou D (2006) Generating test sequences from UML sequence diagrams and state diagrams. GI Jahrestagung 2:236–240

    Google Scholar 

  31. Kansomkeat S, Offutt J, Abdurazik A, Baldini A (2008) A comparative evaluation of tests generated from different UML diagrams. In: Ninth ACIS international conference on software engineering, artificial intelligence, networking, and parallel/distributed computing, SNPD’08, pp 867–872

  32. Granda MF (2014) An experiment design for validating a test case generation strategy from requirements models. In: 2014 IEEE 4th international workshop on empirical requirements engineering (EmpiRE), pp 44–47

  33. Swain SK, Mohapatra DP, Mall R (2010) Test case generation based on state and activity models. J Object Technol 9(5):1–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Yuan Y, Li Z, Sun W (2006) A graph-search based approach to BPEL4WS test generation. In: International conference on software engineering advances, pp 14–22

  35. Hauser R, Koehler J (2004) Compiling process graphs into executable code. In: International conference on generative programming and component engineering (GPCE), pp 317–336

  36. Cruz EF, Machado RJ, Santos MY (2014) From business process models to use case models: a systematic approach. In: Enterprise engineering working conference, pp 167–181

  37. Dijkman RM, Joosten SM, Utopics OF (2002) An algorithm to derive use case diagrams from business process models. In: Proceedings of the 6th international conference on software engineering and applications (SEA), pp 679–684

  38. Liew P, Kontogiannis K, Tong T (2005) A framework for business model driven development. In: The 12th IEEE international workshop on software technology and engineering practice (STEP), pp 1–8

  39. Abilov M, Gomez JM (2014) Derivation of event-based state machines from business processes. In: Proceedings of the international conference on new trends in information and communication technologies

  40. Chinosi M, Trombetta A (2012) A. BPMN: an introduction to the standard. Comput Stand Interfaces 34(1):124–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Amiri MJ, Parsa S, Mohammadzade Lajevardi A (2016) Multifaceted service identification: process, requirement and data. Comput Sci Inf Syst 13(2):335–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Amiri MJ, Koupaee M (2017) Data-driven business process similarity. IET Softw 11(6):309–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Sun Y, Su J (2011) Computing degree of parallelism for BPMN processes. In: International conference on service-oriented computing (ICSOC), pp 1–15

  44. Liu R, Kumar A (2005) An analysis and taxonomy of unstructured workflows. In: international conference on business process management (BPM), pp 268–284

  45. Veanes M, Campbell C, Grieskamp W, Schulte W, Tillmann N, Nachmanson L (2008) Model-based testing of object-oriented reactive systems with Spec Explorer. In: Hierons RM, Bowen JP, Harman M (eds) Formal Methods and Testing. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4949. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  46. Activiti tool documentation. https://github.com/Activiti/activiti-examples. Accessed 19 May 2018

  47. Camunda tool documentation. https://camunda.org/examples/. Accessed 19 May 2018

  48. Eshuis R, Kumar A (2016) Converting unstructured into semi-structured process models. Data Knowl Eng 101:43–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Polyvyanyy A, García-Bañuelos L, Dumas M (2010) Structuring acyclic process models. In: international conference on business process management (BPM), pp 276–293

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Engineering, Tehran University, Tehran, Tehran, Iran

    Arezoo Yazdani Seqerloo

  2. Department of Computer Science, University of California Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA, USA

    Mohammad Javad Amiri & Mahnaz Koupaee

  3. Department of Computer Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Tehran, Iran

    Saeed Parsa

Authors
  1. Arezoo Yazdani Seqerloo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mohammad Javad Amiri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Saeed Parsa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mahnaz Koupaee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohammad Javad Amiri.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yazdani Seqerloo, A., Amiri, M.J., Parsa, S. et al. Automatic test cases generation from business process models. Requirements Eng 24, 119–132 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00766-018-0304-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00766-018-0304-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation