The OMG UML Testing Profile in Use--An Industrial Case Study for the Future Internet Testing

Uploaded on

The EU funded FITTEST FP7 project aims to address the Future Internet (FI) testing challenges. FITTEST will be integrated in three pilot applications provided by three industrial partners, IBM, Sulake …

The EU funded FITTEST FP7 project aims to address the Future Internet (FI) testing challenges. FITTEST will be integrated in three pilot applications provided by three industrial partners, IBM, Sulake and Soft am. This paper presents the Modelio SaaS product and case study context selected by Soft am as FITTEST Project industrial application and the usage of the Object Management Group (OMG) UML Testing Profile module. In the paper, researchers present the advanced software engineering methods proposed by FITTEST and the usage of the OMG UML Testing Profile (UTP) in a real industrial environment within Softeam and Modelio SaaS.

More in: Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
  • Alessandra Bagnato, Andrey Sadovykh, Etienne Brosse (Softeam R&D) and Tanja E.J. Vos, (Universitat Politècnica de València)
    Software Maintenance and Reengineering (CSMR), 2013 17th European Conference on , vol., no., pp.457,460, 5-8 March 2013

    ISSN : 1534-5351
    Print ISBN: 978-1-4673-5833-0
    Digital Object Identifier : 10.1109/CSMR.2013.71

    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads


Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds



Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

    No notes for slide


  • 1. FITTESTFUTURE INTERNET TESTING(ICT-257574, 2010-2013)THE OMG UML TESTING PROFILE IN USE - ANINDUSTRIAL CASE STUDY FOR THE FUTURE INTERNETTESTING.17th European Conference on Software Maintenanceand ReengineeringMarch 8th, 2013, Genova, ItalyAlessandra Bagnato, Softeam R&D
  • 2. FITTEST PROJECT PARTICIPANTS(SEPTEMBER 2010- DECEMBER 2013)Participant organisation CountryUniversidad Politécnica de Valencia (coordinator) SpainUniversity College London United KingdomBerner & Mattner Systemtechnik GermanyIBM IsraelFondazione Bruno Kessler ItalyUtrecht University The NetherlandsSofteam FranceSulake Finland
  • 3. FUTURE INTERNET The Future Internet (FI) a complex interconnection of services, applications,content Society increasingly dependent on FI critical activities such as social services, learning,finance, business, as well as entertainment. Challenging problems for quality assurance/testing
  • 4. FUTURE INTERNET: CHALLENGES (1) CH1 Self modification Rich clients have increased capability to dynamically adaptthe structure of the Web pages; server-side services arereplaced and recomposed dynamically based on ServiceLevel Agreements (SLA) and newly discovered services. CH2 Autonomic behaviour FI applications are highly autonomous; their correct behaviourcannot be specified precisely at design-time. CH3 Low observability FI applications are composed of an increasing number of 3rd-party components and services, accessed as a black box,which are hard to test.
  • 5. FUTURE INTERNET: CHALLENGES (2) CH4 Asynchronous interactions FI applications are highly asynchronous and hence hard to test. Eachclient submits multiple requests asynchronously; multiple clients run inparallel; server-side computation is distributed over the network andconcurrent. CH5 Time and load dependent behaviour For FI applications, factors like timing and load conditions make it hard toreproduce errors during debugging. CH6 Huge feature configuration space FI applications are highly customisable and self-configuring, and containa huge number of configurable features, such as user-, context-, andenvironment-dependent parameters. CH7 Ultra-large scale FI applications are often systems of systems; traditional testing adequacycriteria cannot be applied, since even in good testing situations lowcoverage will be achieved.
  • 6. FITTEST PROJECT Aims at addressing FI testing challenges; Continuous evolutionary automated testing; Developing an integrated testing environment; Assessment of developed techniques on FIapplications provided by industrial partners: Softeam (Modelio CASE Tool); IBM (Highly scalable services for web applications); Sulake (Habbo Hotel).
  • 8. MODELIO SAAS CASE STUDYModelio SaaS is a proof-of-concept project,it extends Modelio UML modeling toolsharing facilities by making the distributedenvironment configuration transparent forits users.Runs on different cloud platformspresenting high number of configurations tochallenge testing.
  • 9. MODELIO FOR SOFTWAREAND SYSTEM ENGINEERING UML editor with more than 20 years’ history UTP SysML MARTE Code generation Documentation• Available under opensource at
  • 12. MODELIO CASE STUDY FI Applications Low Observability Modelio SaaS is composed by different components andservices, accessed as a black box, we will maximizeusers‘ interaction coverage of our test suite throughFITTEST B&M CTE Combinatorial testing. FI Applications Autonomic Behavior Explore possible inputs dynamically and look forsuspicious behavior by using FITTEST GUI Testing tool toevaluate the unexpected ways that users use the ModelioSaaS services . FI Applications Asynchronous interactions Multiple clients run in parallel and server-side computationis distributed over the network we will generate a modelof the system that is human-readable.
  • 13. UML TESTING PROFILE UML natively lacks concepts for testing ofsystems/software Domain-independent specification of test conceptsbased on UML A language for creation, documentation, visualization,specification and exchange of model-based testspecifications It provides concepts for Test behavior, observations and activities during a test; Test architecture, the elementsinvolved in a test and theirrelationships; Test data, the structures and meaning of values to beprocessed in a test; Time constraints and time observation for test execution.
  • 14. UTP PROFILE HISTORY 2001: RFP for a test-related UML profile 2003: Initial submission elaborated by testers, UMLand test solution vendors Industrial members (a.o. Ericcson, Telelogic, IBM,Softeam) Academic members (a.o. Fraunhofer FOKUS,University Luebeck) 2005: Final adopted version 1.0 released by theOMG June 2010: UTP 1.1 RTF was chartered June 2011: UTP 1.2 was chartered September 2012: UTP v2 RFI .. June, 2013: RFP for a UML Testing Profile 2specification (hopefully  ) during the OMGTechnical Meeting in Berlin in June, 2013.
  • 17. USER-FRIENDLINESS OF THEMODELING ENVIRONMENTThe Modelio UTP Profile implementationincludes all the OMG UML Testing Profilestereotypes and all the feedback receivedfrom the FITTEST consortium to includeproper specific commands within theModelio Graphical user interface
  • 18. CONCLUSIONS FI Applications Low Observability FITTEST B&M CTE Combinatorial testing. FI Applications Autonomic Behavior FITTEST GUI Testing tool to evaluate the unexpectedways that users use the Modelio SaaS services . FI Applications Asynchronous interactions UTP Modeling and Fittest continuous testing ITEenvironment.
  • 19. THANKS! Alessandra BagnatoSofteam R&D, FITTEST: EU FP7 Project RCIS 2013 _ Industrial Day Paris 31st May 2013 Modelio Web Site: http:// Modelio UML Testing Profile :