Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Validation and automatic test generation on UML models: the AGATHA approach

  • Special section on formal methods for industrial critical systems
  • Published:
International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

UML-based methodologies take more and more space in the software development domain. In addition, the need to validate applications as early as possible in the development cycle is now mandatory to satisfy cost and time-to-market constraints. In this context, this paper describes, first, how to bridge the gap between semiformal UML models and a formal technology ensuring test case generation. Second, the formal tool used to automatically generate test sequences, named AGATHA, is described in minute detail. Finally, this approach is illustrated throughout by a toy example of an elevator system.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Buy U, Orso A, Pezzé M (2000) Automated testing of classes. In: Proceedings of ISSTA’00, Portland, OR, 21–24 August 2000, pp 39–48

  2. Clarke EM, Grumberg O, Peled DA (1999) Model checking. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

  3. Clarke LA (1976) A system to generate test data and symbolically execute programs. IEEE Trans Softw Eng SE-2(3):215–222

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Dershowitz N, Jouannaud J-P (1990) Rewrite systems. In: van Leeuwen J (ed) Handbook of theoretical computer science, vol B. Elsevier, North-Holland, pp 243–320

  5. Fernandez J-C, Jard C, Jeron T, Viho C (1996) Using on the fly verification techniques for the generation of test suites. In: Proceedings of CAV’96, New Brunswick, NJ, 31 July–3 August 1996. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 1102. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

  6. Gallois J-P, Lanusse A (1997) Le tests structurel pour la vérification de spécifications de systèmes industriels. Génie logiciel 46:145–150

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gallois J-P, Lapitre A, Lé P (1999) Analyse de spécifications industrielles et génération automatique de tests. In: Proceedings of ICSSEA’99, CNAM-Paris, France, 8–10 December 1999, vol 3

  8. Gérard S (2000) The ACCORD/UML profile. CEA-LIST, Internal report, Gif sur Yvette, France

  9. Gérard S, Voros NS, Koulamas C (2000) Efficient system modeling of complex real-time industry; networks using the ACCORD/UML methodology. In: Proceedings of DIPES’00, Schloss Eringerfeld, Germany, 18–19 October 2000, pp 11–22

  10. Harel D (1987) Statecharts: a visual formalism for complex systems. Sci Comput Programm 8:231–274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hartmann J, Imoberdorf C, Meisinger M (2000) UML-based integration testing. In: Proceedings of ISSTA’00, Portland, OR, 21–24 August 2000, pp 60–70

  12. Hennessy M, Lin H (1995) Symbolic bisimulations. Theor Comput Sci 138:353–389

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Henzinger TA, Nicollin X, Sifakis J, Yovine S (1992) Symbolic model checking for real-time systems. In: Proceedings of the 7th IEEE conference on logics in computer science (LICS), Santa Cruz, CA, pp 394–406

  14. Huang J-C (1975) An approach to program testing. ACM Comput Surv 7(3):113–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Ishisone M, Sawada T (2001) Brute: brute force rewriting engine. JAIST – Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, January. http://www.theta.theta.ro/cafeobj

  16. ISO (1997) Estelle – a formal description technique based on an extended state transition model. ISO/TC97/SC21, IS 9074

  17. Kamp G, Wache H (1996) CTL: a description logic with expressive concrete domains. In: Holldobler St (ed) Proceedings of KI-96, 20. Deutsche Jahrestagung für Künstliche Intelligenz, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

  18. King J-C (1976) Symbolic execution and program testing. Commun ACM 19(7):385–394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Klop JW (1991) Term of rewriting systems. In: Gabbay D, Abramski S, Maibaum T (eds) Handbook of logic in computer science, vol 1. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK

  20. Lapitre A (2002) Procédure de réduction pour les systèmes à base d’automates comunnicants: formalisation et mise en oeuvre. PhD thesis, University of Paris XI, France, in collaboration with the CEA, December

  21. Lugato D, Rapin N, Gallois J-P (2001) Verification and tests generation for SDL industrial specifications with the AGATHA toolset. In: Proceedings of the workshop on real-time tools (CONCUR’01), Aalborg, Denmark, 21–24 August 2001

  22. Milner R (1989) Communication and concurrency. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ

  23. OMG (2003) Unified Modelling Language 1.4. OMG, Report formal/2000-03-01, March 2003. http://www.omg.org

  24. Pierron J-Y (2003) Définition de critères de sélection de tests fonctionnels pour la validation des systèmes électroniques embarqués. PhD thesis, University of Evry, France, in collaboration with the CEA and PSA, April

  25. Pierron J-Y, Gallois J-P, Fievet E, Lapitre A, Lugato D (2000) Validation de systèmes industriels par le test symbolique sur spécification STATEMATE. In: Proceedings of ICSSEA’00, CNAM-Paris, France, 5–8 December, vol 2

  26. Presburger M (1929) Über die Vollständigkeit eines gewissen Systems der Arithmetic. Comptes rendus du premier Congrès de Mathématiques des Pays Slaves 395:92–101

  27. Rumbaugh J, Jacobson I, Booch G (1998) The unified modelling language reference manual. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA

  28. Tessier P, Gérard S, Mraidha C, Terrier F, Geib J-M (2003) A component-based methodology for embedded systems prototyping. In: Proceedings of the workshop on rapid system prototyping, San Diego, 9–11 June 2003

  29. Wolper P, Godefroid P (1993) Partial-order methods for temporal verification. In: Proceedings of CONCUR’93, Hildesheim, Belgium, August 1993, pp 233–246

  30. Wonnacott DG (1995) Constraint based array dependence analysis. PhD Thesis, University of Maryland, College Park, MD

  31. Yovine S (1997) Kronos: a verification tool for real time systems. Int J Softw Tools Technol Transfer 1(1/2):123–133

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. DTSI/SLA/LLSP – CEA Saclay-Bat. 451, F-91191, Gif sur Yvette Cedex, France

    David Lugato, Céline Bigot, Yannick Valot, Jean-Pierre Gallois, Sébastien Gérard & François Terrier

Authors
  1. David Lugato
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Céline Bigot
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yannick Valot
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jean-Pierre Gallois
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sébastien Gérard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. François Terrier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David Lugato.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lugato, D., Bigot, C., Valot, Y. et al. Validation and automatic test generation on UML models: the AGATHA approach. STTT 5, 124–139 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10009-003-0133-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10009-003-0133-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation