Model-based test cases synthesis using UML interaction diagrams

Abstract

UML 2.0 interaction diagrams model interactions in complex systems by means of operation fragments and a systematic testing approach is required for the identification and selection of test cases. The major problem for test cases synthesis from such an interaction diagram is to arrive at a comprehensive system behavior in the presence of multiple, nested fragments. In this regard, our approach is towards systematic interpretation of flow of controls as well as their subsequent usage in the test case synthesis. We also simplify the proposed flow of controls on the basis of control primitives resulting from UML 2.0 fragments and bring it to a testable form known as intermediate testable model (ITM), which is suitable for deriving system level test cases.

An Approach to Convert XMI Representation of UML 2.x Interaction Diagram into Control Flow Graph

“…The interaction diagram in Figure 2(a) has five messages m1, m2, m3, m4, and m5 and two fragments opt 1 and alt 1 . Figure 2 Let us consider the mapping rules used for construction of a graph representation from an interaction diagram [2,4,11,17,18]. As per the mapping rules: (1) message, start and end of a fragment are mapped into nodes in the graph representation; (2) an edge is considered between two nodes representing (a) two messages where one message follows another, or (b) one message and start of a fragment where the fragment follows the message, or (c) end of a fragment and one message where message follows the fragment, or (d) end of a fragment and start of another fragment where second fragment follows the first one; (3) for each fragment, edges are drawn (a) from the node representing the start of a fragment to the node representing the first element (message, fragment) in each of its operands and (b) from the node corresponding to the last element of each operand of the fragment to the node corresponding to end of that fragment.…”

“…However, control flow analysis in the context of XMI representation of UML interaction diagram (it is referred as sequence diagram in earlier version of UML 2.x) has scarcely been reported [2,4,5,11,17,18]. Garousi et al [17,18] propose a methodology to analyze control flow of UML 2.x sequence diagrams using formal annotations in object constraint language (OCL).…”

“…Second, Sarma's work has not reported how to obtain SDG from XMI representation of sequence diagram but our approach includes a detailed conversion process from XMI of UML 2.x sequence diagram into control flow graph. Nayak and Samanta [4] propose an approach to synthesize test cases from UML 2.0 interaction diagrams. They convert interaction diagrams into a control flow graph called scenario graph encapsulating control flow and fragment structure.…”

“…Currently, UML models are being used in many software engineering tasks such as program analysis, testing, and coverage analysis [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11]. For automation of these tasks, it is necessary to construct a control flow graph from UML models.…”

“…Existing approaches [2,4,11,17,18] consider a set of mapping rules to construct control flow graph from interaction diagrams [12]. Mapping rules are in essence as follows.…”