2015 IEEE Eighth International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshops (ICSTW) 2015
DOI: 10.1109/icstw.2015.7107405
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Model-based approach for automated test case generation from visual requirement specifications

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Singi et al [21] proposed an MB-TCG approach for testing from visual requirement specifications, focusing specifically on prototyping. The TDG in this approach was considered a manual process because the test cases only provided templates for the tester to enter appropriate test data.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Singi et al [21] proposed an MB-TCG approach for testing from visual requirement specifications, focusing specifically on prototyping. The TDG in this approach was considered a manual process because the test cases only provided templates for the tester to enter appropriate test data.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Generally two approaches are used for test suite automation -software requirements specification (SRS) analysis and source code parsing. In SRS analysis, test cases are automatically generated from requirements, various UML diagrams -class, state, sequence diagrams and also from GUI screens (Nebut et al, 2006;Chen et al, 2006;Conroy et al, 2007;Cartaxo et al, 2007;Javed et al, 2007;Utting and Legeard, 2007;Enoiu et al, 2013;Sharma and Biswas, 2014;Singi et al, 2015;Khatun and Sakib, 2016). This approach can also be referred as semantic approach because the software specification is considered here.…”
Section: Motivationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, as SRS is created in the early development stage, the diagrams are often backdated and do not match the software code segments completely. Nebut et al (2006) proposed a semantic test generation approach using use cases and sequence diagrams and Singi et al (2015) used visual requirement specifications or prototypes as semantics for automated test generation. Both the papers suffered from the inherent drawbacks of semantic approach.…”
Section: Motivationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations