2013Software Testing Verification and ReliabilityRequires access

Automatic test case generation from Simulink/Stateflow models using model checking

Swarup Kumar Mohalik, Ambar A. Gadkari, Anand Yeolekar, K. C. Shashidhar, S. Ramesh

Open publisher page 47 citations

Abstract

SUMMARY Model‐based test generation techniques based on random input generation and guided simulation do not satisfy the demands of high test coverage and completeness guarantees as required by safety‐critical applications. Recently, test generation techniques based on model checking have been reported to bridge this gap. To evaluate the effectiveness of these techniques, an in‐house tool suite, AutoMOTGen, has been developed for Simulink/Stateflow and applied on real‐life case studies at General Motors. This paper outlines the test generation methodology of AutoMOTGen and gives a comparative study with a commercial, primarily random input‐based, test generation tool on the same set of examples. The results indicate that in terms of coverage, model checking‐based techniques complement the random input‐based techniques. In addition, they provide proofs for unreachability that can aid in debugging the models. Therefore, it is recommended that model checking‐based tools be utilized to complement and enhance the effectiveness of model‐based testing methods in safety‐critical systems engineering. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

SUMMARY Model‐based test generation techniques based on random input generation and guided simulation do not satisfy the demands of high test coverage and completeness guarantees as required by safety‐critical applications. Recently, test generation techniques based on model checking have been reported to bridge this gap. To evaluate the effectiveness of these techniques, an in‐house tool suite, AutoMOTGen, has been developed for Simulink/Stateflow and applied on real‐life case studies at General Motors. This paper outlines the test generation methodology of AutoMOTGen and gives a comparative study with a commercial, primarily random input‐based, test generation tool on the same set of examples. The results indicate that in terms of coverage, model checking‐based techniques complement the random input‐based techniques. In addition, they provide proofs for unreachability that can aid in debugging the models. Therefore, it is recommended that model checking‐based tools be utilized to complement and enhance the effectiveness of model‐based testing methods in safety‐critical systems engineering. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 47 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

SUMMARY Model‐based test generation techniques based on random input generation and guided simulation do not satisfy the demands of high test coverage and completeness guarantees as required by safety‐critical applications. Recently, test generation techniques based on model checking have been reported to bridge this gap. To evaluate the effectiveness of these techniques, an in‐house tool suite, AutoMOTGen, has been developed for Simulink/Stateflow and applied on real‐life case studies at General Motors. This paper outlines the test generation methodology of AutoMOTGen and gives a comparative study with a commercial, primarily random input‐based, test generation tool on the same set of examples. The results indicate that in terms of coverage, model checking‐based techniques complement the random input‐based techniques. In addition, they provide proofs for unreachability that can aid in debugging the models. Therefore, it is recommended that model checking‐based tools be utilized to complement and enhance the effectiveness of model‐based testing methods in safety‐critical systems engineering. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Key concepts: Stateflow, Computer science, Test suite, Model checking, Debugging, Random testing, Complement (music), Mathematical proof

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Automatic test case generation from Simulink/Stateflow models using model checking — Research Paper | ScholarLens