https://www.mdu.se/

mdu.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Automation of the creation and execution of system level hardware-in-loop tests through model-based testing
Mälardalen University.
Mälardalen University.
Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering, Embedded Systems.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-2416-4205
Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering, Embedded Systems.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0611-2655
Show others and affiliations
2022 (English)In: A-TEST - Proc. Int. Workshop Autom. Test Case Des., Select., Eval., co-located ESEC/FSE, Association for Computing Machinery, Inc , 2022, p. 9-16Conference paper, Published paper (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

In this paper, we apply model-based testing (MBT) to automate the creation of hardware-in-loop (HIL) test cases. In order to select MBT tools, different tools' properties were compared to each other through a literature study, with the result of selecting GraphWalker and MoMuT tools to be used in an industrial case study. The results show that the generated test cases perform similarly to their manual counterparts regarding how the test cases achieved full requirements coverage. When comparing the effort needed for applying the methods, a comparable effort is required for creating the first iteration, while with every subsequent update, MBT will require less effort compared to the manual process. Both methods achieve 100% requirements coverage, and since manual tests are created and executed by humans, some requirements are favoured over others due to company demands, while MBT tests are generated randomly. In addition, a comparison between the used tools showcased the differences in the models' design and their test case generation. The comparison showed that GraphWalker has a more straightforward design method and is better suited for smaller systems, while MoMuT can handle more complex systems but has a more involved design method.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Association for Computing Machinery, Inc , 2022. p. 9-16
Keywords [en]
GraphWalker, Hardware-in-Loop, Model-Based Testing, MoMuT, Design, Model checking, Testing, Design method, Hardware in loop, Literature studies, Model based testing, Model-based testing tool, Property, System levels, Test case, Iterative methods
National Category
Computer Systems
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-62498DOI: 10.1145/3548659.3561313ISI: 001108948200002Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85142922825ISBN: 9781450394529 (print)OAI: oai:DiVA.org:mdh-62498DiVA, id: diva2:1767369
Conference
13th International Workshop on Automating Test Case Design, Selection and Evaluation, co-located with ESEC/FSE 2022
Available from: 2023-06-14 Created: 2023-06-14 Last updated: 2024-01-24Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records

Enoiu, Eduard PaulAfzal, Wasif

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Aronsson Karlsson, ViktorAlmasri, AhmedEnoiu, Eduard PaulAfzal, Wasif
By organisation
Mälardalen UniversityEmbedded Systems
Computer Systems

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
isbn
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
isbn
urn-nbn
Total: 172 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf