Research Commons
      • Browse 
        • Communities & Collections
        • Titles
        • Authors
        • By Issue Date
        • Subjects
        • Types
        • Series
      • Help 
        • About
        • Collection Policy
        • OA Mandate Guidelines
        • Guidelines FAQ
        • Contact Us
      • My Account 
        • Sign In
        • Register
      View Item 
      •   Research Commons
      • University of Waikato Research
      • Computing and Mathematical Sciences
      • Computing and Mathematical Sciences Papers
      • View Item
      •   Research Commons
      • University of Waikato Research
      • Computing and Mathematical Sciences
      • Computing and Mathematical Sciences Papers
      • View Item
      JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

      A Comparison of State-Based Modelling Tools for Model Validation

      Aydal, Emine G.; Utting, Mark; Woodcock, Jim
      Thumbnail
      Files
      2008_TOOLS_EUROPE.pdf
      192.9Kb
      DOI
       10.1007/978-3-540-69824-1_16
      Link
       www.springerlink.com
      Find in your library  
      Citation
      Export citation
      Aydal, E. G., Utting, M. & Woodcock, J.(2008). A comparison of state-based modelling tools for model validation. In R.F. Paige & B. Meyer(Eds), Proceedings of 46th International Conference, TOOLS EUROPE 2008, Zurich, Switzerland, June 30 - July 4, 2008(pp. 278-296). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
      Permanent Research Commons link: https://hdl.handle.net/10289/1829
      Abstract
      In model-based testing, one of the biggest decisions taken before modelling is the modelling language and the model analysis tool to be used to model the system under investigation. UML, Alloy and Z are examples of popular state-based modelling languages. In the literature, there has been research about the similarities and the differences between modelling languages. However, we believe that, in addition to recognising the expressive power of modelling languages, it is crucial to detect the capabilities and the weaknesses of analysis tools that parse and analyse models written in these languages. In order to explore this area, we have chosen four model analysis tools: USE, Alloy Analyzer, ZLive and ProZ and observed how modelling and validation stages of MBT are handled by these tools for the same system. Through this experiment, we not only concretise the tasks that form the modelling and validation stages of MBT process, but also reveal how efficiently these tasks are carried out in different tools.
      Date
      2008
      Type
      Conference Contribution
      Publisher
      Springer
      Rights
      This is an author’s version of an article published in the Proceedings of 46th International Conference, TOOLS EUROPE 2008, Zurich, Switzerland, June 30 - July 4, 2008. ©2008 Springer.
      Collections
      • Computing and Mathematical Sciences Papers [1455]
      Show full item record  

      Usage

      Downloads, last 12 months
      79
       
       
       

      Usage Statistics

      For this itemFor all of Research Commons

      The University of Waikato - Te Whare Wānanga o WaikatoFeedback and RequestsCopyright and Legal Statement