Classification Tree Method
The Classification Tree Method is a method for test design, as it is used in different areas of software development. It has been developed by Grimm and Grochtmann in 1993. Classification Trees in terms of the Classification Tree Method must not be confused with decision trees.
- Identification of test relevant aspects (so called classifications) and their corresponding values (called classes) as well as
- Combination of different classes from all classifications into test cases.
The identification of test relevant aspects usually follows the (functional) specification (e.g. requirements, use cases …) of the system under test. These aspects form the input and output data space of the test object.
The second step of test design then follows the principles of combinatorial test design.
- 1 Application
- 2 Enhancements
- 3 Advantages
- 4 Limitations
- 5 References
- 6 External links
Prerequisites for applying the classification tree method (CTM) is the selection (or definition) of a system under test. The CTM is a black-box testing method and supports any type of system under test. This includes (but is not limited to) hardware systems, integrated hardware-software systems, plain software systems, including embedded software, user interfaces, operating systems, parsers, and others (or subsystems of mentioned systems).
With a selected system under test, the first step of the classification tree method is the identification of test relevant aspects. Any system under test can be described by a set of classifications, holding both input and output parameters. (Input parameters can also include environments states, pre-conditions and other, rather uncommon parameters). Each classification can have any number of disjoint classes, describing the occurrence of the parameter. The selection of classes typically follows the principle of equivalence partitioning for abstract test cases and boundary-value analysis for concrete test cases. Together, all classifications form the classification tree. For semantic purpose, classifications can be grouped into compositions.
The maximum number of test cases is the Cartesian product of all classes of all classifications in the tree, quickly resulting in large numbers for realistic test problems. The minimum number of test cases is the number of classes in the classification with the most containing classes.
In the seconds step, test cases are composed by selecting exactly one class from every classification of the classification tree. The selection of test cases originally was a manual task to be performed by the test engineer.
For a database system, test design has to be performed. Applying the classification tree method, the identification of test relevant aspects gives the classifications: User Privilege, Operation and Access Method. For the User Privileges, two classes can be identified: Regular User and Administrator User. There are three Operations: Add, Edit and Delete. For the Access Method, again three classes are identified: Native Tool, Web Browser, API. The Web Browser class is further refined with the test aspect Brand, three possible classes are included here: Internet Explorer, Mozilla Firefox, and Apple Safari.
The first step of the classification tree method now is complete. Of course, there are further possible test aspects to include, e.g. access speed of the connection, number of database records present in the database, etc. Using the graphical representation in terms of a tree, the selected aspects and their corresponding values can quickly be reviewed.
For the statistics, there are 30 possible test cases in total (2 privileges * 3 operations * 5 access methods). For minimum coverage, 5 test cases are sufficient, as there are 5 access methods (and access method is the classification with the highest number of disjoint classes).
In the second step, three test cases have been manually selected:
- A regular user adds a new data set to the database using the native tool.
- An administrator user edits an existing data set using the Firefox browser.
- A regular user deletes a data set from the database using the API.
- Notation: CPM only had a textual notation, whereas CTM uses a graphical, tree-shaped representation.
- Refinements Selecting one representative might have an influence on the occurrence of other representatives.
- CPM only offers restrictions to handle this scenario.
- CTM allows modeling of hierarchical refinements in the classification tree, also called implicit dependencies.
- Tool support: The tool presented by Ostrand and Balcer only supported test case generation, but not the partitioning itself.
- Grochtmann and Wegener presented their tool, the Classification Tree Editor (CTE) which supports both partitioning as well as test case generation.
Classification Tree Method for Embedded Systems
The classification tree method first was intended for the design and specification of abstract test cases. With the classification tree method for embedded systems, test implementation can also be performed. Several additional features are integrated with the method:
- In addition to atomic test cases, test sequences containing several test steps can be specified.
- A concrete timing (e.g. in Seconds, Minutes ...) can be specified for each test step.
- Signal transitions (e.g. linear, spline, sine ...) between selected classes of different test steps can be specified.
- A distinction between event and state can be modelled, represented by different visual marks in a test.
Dependency Rules and Automated Test Case Generation
One way of modelling constraints is using the refinement mechanism in the classification tree method. This, however, does not allow for modelling constraints between classes of different classifications. Lehmann and Wegener introduced Dependency Rules based on Boolean expressions with their incarnation of the CTE. Further features include the automated generation of test suites using combinatorial test design (e.g. all-pairs testing).
Prioritized Test Case Generation
Recent enhancements to the classification tree method include the prioritized test case generation: It is possible to assign weights to the elements of the classification tree in terms of occurrence and error probability or risk. These weights are then used during test case generation to prioritize test cases. Statistical testing is also available (e.g. for wear and fatigue tests) by interpreting the element weights as a discrete probability distribution.
Test Sequence Generation
With the addition of valid transitions between individual classes of a classification, classifications can be interpreted as a state machine, and therefore the whole classification tree as a Statechart. This defines an allowed order of class usages in test steps and allows to automatically create test sequences. Different coverage levels are available, such as state coverage, transitions coverage and coverage of state pairs and transition pairs.
In addition to Boolean dependency rules referring to classes of the classification tree, Numerical Constraints allow to specify formulas with classifications as variables, which will evaluate to the selected class in a test case.
- Graphical representation of test relevant aspects
- Method for both identification of relevant test aspects and their combination into test cases
- When test design with the classification tree method is performed without proper test decomposition, classification trees can get large and cumbersome.
- New users tend to include too many (esp. irrelevant) test aspects resulting in too many test cases.
- There is no algorithm or strict guidance for selection of test relevant aspects.
- Bath, Graham; McKay, Judy (2008). The software test engineer's handbook : a study guide for the ISTQB test analyst and technical test analyst advanced level certificates (1st ed.). Santa Barbara, CA: Rocky Nook. ISBN 9781933952246.
- Hass, Anne Mette Jonassen (2008). Guide to advanced software testing. Boston: Artech House. pp. 179–186. ISBN 1596932864.
- Grochtmann, Matthias; Grimm, Klaus (1993). "Classification Trees for Partition Testing". Software Testing, Verification & Reliability 3 (2): 63–82. doi:10.1002/stvr.4370030203.
- Kuhn, D. Richard; Kacker, Raghu N.; Lei, Yu (2013). Introduction to combinatorial testing. Crc Pr Inc. pp. 76–81. ISBN 1466552298.
- Henry, Pierre (2008). The testing network an integral approach to test activities in large software projects. Berlin: Springer. p. 87. ISBN 978-3-540-78504-0.
- Grochtmann, Matthias; Wegener, Joachim (1995). "Test Case Design Using Classification Trees and the Classification-Tree Editor CTE". Proceedings of the 8th International Software Quality Week(QW '95), San Francisco, USA.
- Ostrand, T. J.; Balcer, M. J. (1988). "The category-partition method for specifying and generating functional tests". Communications of the ACM 31 (6): 676–686. doi:10.1145/62959.62964.
- Conrad, Mirko; Krupp, Alexander (1 October 2006). "An Extension of the Classification-Tree Method for Embedded Systems for the Description of Events". Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 164 (4): 3–11. doi:10.1016/j.entcs.2006.09.002.
- Lehmann, Eckard; Wegener, Joachim (2000). "Test Case Design by Means of the CTE XL". Proceedings of the 8th European International Conference on Software Testing, Analysis & Review (EuroSTAR 2000).
- Kruse, Peter M.; Luniak, Magdalena (12 2010). "Automated Test Case Generation Using Classification Trees". Software Quality Professional 13 (1): 4–12.
- Kruse, Peter M.; Wegener, Joachim (4 2012). "Test Sequence Generation from Classification Trees". Software Testing, Verification and Validation (ICST), 2012 IEEE Fifth International Conference on: 539–548. doi:10.1109/ICST.2012.139. ISBN 978-0-7695-4670-4.
- Kruse, Peter M.; Bauer, Jürgen; Wegener, Joachim (4 2012). "Numerical Constraints for Combinatorial Interaction Testing". Software Testing, Verification and Validation (ICST), 2012 IEEE Fifth International Conference on: 758–763. doi:10.1109/ICST.2012.170. ISBN 978-0-7695-4670-4.
- Chen, T.Y.; Poon, P.-L. (1996). "Classification-Hierarchy Table: a methodology for constructing the classification tree". Australian Software Engineering Conference, 1996., Proceedings of 1996: 93–104. doi:10.1109/ASWEC.1996.534127. ISBN 0-8186-7635-3.
- Further reading Systematic Testing