Abstract
Among software testing techniques for the detection of software defects, state-transition-based testing which utilizes state diagrams is pretty well known and is being used widely. Such software testing techniques that are based on specifications of a software and perform various tests by utilizing a number of state diagrams are quite well known. According to different testing environment including individuals, applied methods, and the size of a perceived system, the resulting diagrams might highly show the discrepancy regarding some perspectives such as correctness, the quality of representation, and so on. This significantly affects the understanding of a system such that the system under consideration might be interpreted in different ways. The highly complex state diagrams can have a negative effect on the productive and positive utilization of state diagrams in the software system development including the analysis or the state-transition-based test process. Many state diagram-based process conventional approaches for automatic software analysis do not take the complexity problem into deep consideration so much. Moreover, the state diagrams generated by the methods that place a strong emphasis on complexity can generate inappropriate test cases according to the possible misled guidelines or the incorrect objectives. In this paper, we propose methods for resolution of the complexity problem in a state diagram without modification of the states or the transition relationships. In our proposed methods, we provide a representation model in which a software system can be interpreted in the context of a state diagram and an automatic generation method for the proposed representation. We also illustrate a case study for justification of plausibility of the proposed methods.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
NIPA (2012) Software engineering. Whitebook, Korea
Beizer B (1984) Software system testing and quality assurance. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York
IPL Information Processing Ltd. (2011) Testing state machine with ada TEST and CANTATA, IPL paper
Harel D (1987) Statecharts: a visual formalism for complex systems. Sci Comput Program 8(3):231–274
Larman C (2004) Applying UML and patterns: an introduction to object-oriented analysis and design and iterative development. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs
Ambler SW (2005) The elements of UML 2.0 style. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Derr KW (1995) Applying OMT: a practical step-by-step guide to using the object modeling technique. SIGS Publications
Cruz-Lemus JA, Maes A, Genero M, Poelsand G, Piattini M (2010) The impact of structural complexity on the understandability of UML statechart diagrams. Inf Sci: Int J 180(11):2209–2220
Genero M, Mirandaand D, Piattini M (2003) Defining metrics for UML statechart diagrams in a methodological way. Lect Notes Comput Sci 2814:118–128
Cruz-Lemus JA, Genero M, Ovlivas JA, Romero FP, Piattini M (2004) Predicting UML statechart diagrams understandability using fuzzy logic-based techniques. In: Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering (SEKE’2004), 238–245
Miranda D, Genero M, Piattini M (2005) Empirical validation of metrics for UML statechart diagrams. In: Enterprise information systems, 101–108
Choi SK, Park YB (2013) Derivation of state transition diagram from class using tree structure. KTSDE 2(1):19–26
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Park, JH., Park, Y.B. & Choi, SK. Representation and automatic generation of state-transition mapping tree. J Supercomput 74, 3855–3874 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-018-2393-7
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-018-2393-7