DOI: 10.11606/t.55.2019.tde-10012019-085746
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Automatic generation of configurable test-suites for software product lines

Abstract: First of all, I would like to thank my advisors Prof. Adenilso Simao and Prof. Mohammad Reza Mousavi for excellent guidance. Thanks for encouraging and challenging me and also for good cooperation. I would also like to thank my other colleagues at the department of computer science and especially the software engineering research group for the inspiring and developing work environment. Thanks to all who have participated in focus group meeting and questionnaires. Finally, thanks to my family, my parents, my br… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
8
0

Publication Types

Select...
1
1

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
1
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Analyzing (e.g., validating, verifying, and testing) and maintaining SPLs on a productbased basis is demanding due to the number of valid configurations (THÜM et al, 2014a). Hence, substantial effort has been spent on extending notations and associated reasoning techniques to SPLs (GRULER; LEUCKER; SCHEIDEMANN, 2008;CLASSEN et al, 2013;MOUSAVI, 2014;FRAGAL;MOUSAVI, 2017). These have led to family-based techniques relying on unified representations of all valid products known as family model (THÜM et al, 2014a) or 150% model (BEUCHE; SCHULZE; DUVIGNEAU, 2016).…”
Section: Motivationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…Analyzing (e.g., validating, verifying, and testing) and maintaining SPLs on a productbased basis is demanding due to the number of valid configurations (THÜM et al, 2014a). Hence, substantial effort has been spent on extending notations and associated reasoning techniques to SPLs (GRULER; LEUCKER; SCHEIDEMANN, 2008;CLASSEN et al, 2013;MOUSAVI, 2014;FRAGAL;MOUSAVI, 2017). These have led to family-based techniques relying on unified representations of all valid products known as family model (THÜM et al, 2014a) or 150% model (BEUCHE; SCHULZE; DUVIGNEAU, 2016).…”
Section: Motivationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Analyzing software product lines (SPL) on a product-based basis is very demanding and cumbersome, due to the number of possible products (THÜM et al, 2014a), crosscutting features (SCHAEFER et al, 2012), and the need to cater for possible feature interactions (APEL et al, 2013). Hence, family-based approaches have been developed to facilitate the analysis of SPLs without going individually through each and every product (BENDUHN et al, 2015;CLASSEN et al, 2013;MOUSAVI, 2014;FRAGAL;MOUSAVI, 2017). Such familybased approaches pave the way for efficient model-based analysis of SPL and typically involve a variability-aware behavioral specification referred to as a family model (THÜM et al, 2014a) or 150% model (BEUCHE; SCHULZE; DUVIGNEAU, 2016).…”
Section: Chapter 4 Family Model Learning For Product Linesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations