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.

1. FITTEST
FUTURE INTERNET TESTING
(ICT-257574, 2010-2013)
THE OMG UML TESTING PROFILE IN USE - AN
INDUSTRIAL CASE STUDY FOR THE FUTURE INTERNET
TESTING.
17th European Conference on Software Maintenance
and Reengineering
March 8th, 2013, Genova, Italy
Alessandra Bagnato, Softeam R&D

2. FITTEST PROJECT PARTICIPANTS
(SEPTEMBER 2010- DECEMBER 2013)
Participant organisation Country
Universidad Politécnica de Valencia (coordinator) Spain
University College London United Kingdom
Berner & Mattner Systemtechnik Germany
IBM Israel
Fondazione Bruno Kessler Italy
Utrecht University The Netherlands
Softeam France
Sulake 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 adapt
the structure of the Web pages; server-side services are
replaced and recomposed dynamically based on Service
Level Agreements (SLA) and newly discovered services.
 CH2 Autonomic behaviour
 FI applications are highly autonomous; their correct behaviour
cannot 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. Each
client submits multiple requests asynchronously; multiple clients run in
parallel; server-side computation is distributed over the network and
concurrent.
 CH5 Time and load dependent behaviour
 For FI applications, factors like timing and load conditions make it hard to
reproduce errors during debugging.
 CH6 Huge feature configuration space
 FI applications are highly customisable and self-configuring, and contain
a huge number of configurable features, such as user-, context-, and
environment-dependent parameters.
 CH7 Ultra-large scale
 FI applications are often systems of systems; traditional testing adequacy
criteria cannot be applied, since even in good testing situations low
coverage 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 FI
applications provided by industrial partners:
 Softeam (Modelio CASE Tool);
 IBM (Highly scalable services for web applications);
 Sulake (Habbo Hotel).

7. HOW: THE GLOBAL PICTURE

8. MODELIO SAAS CASE STUDY
Modelio SaaS is a proof-of-concept project,
it extends Modelio UML modeling tool
sharing facilities by making the distributed
environment configuration transparent for
its users.
Runs on different cloud platforms
presenting high number of configurations to
challenge testing.

9. MODELIO FOR SOFTWARE
AND SYSTEM ENGINEERING
 UML editor with more than 20 years’ history
 UTP
 SysML
 MARTE
 Code generation
 Documentation
 Teamwork
www.modeliosoft.com
• Available under open
source at Modelio.org

10. MODELIO SAAS CASE STUDY

11. MODELIO SAAS WEB UI PHP
CONTROLLERS

12. MODELIO CASE STUDY
 FI Applications Low Observability
 Modelio SaaS is composed by different components and
services, accessed as a black box, we will maximize
users‘ interaction coverage of our test suite through
FITTEST B&M CTE Combinatorial testing.
 FI Applications Autonomic Behavior
 Explore possible inputs dynamically and look for
suspicious behavior by using FITTEST GUI Testing tool to
evaluate the unexpected ways that users use the Modelio
SaaS services .
 FI Applications Asynchronous interactions
 Multiple clients run in parallel and server-side computation
is distributed over the network we will generate a model
of the system that is human-readable.

13. UML TESTING PROFILE
 UML natively lacks concepts for testing of
systems/software
 Domain-independent specification of test concepts
based on UML
 A language for creation, documentation, visualization,
specification and exchange of model-based test
specifications
 It provides concepts for
 Test behavior, observations and activities during a test;
 Test architecture, the elementsinvolved in a test and their
relationships;
 Test data, the structures and meaning of values to be
processed 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, UML
and 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 the
OMG
 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 2
specification (hopefully  ) during the OMG
Technical Meeting in Berlin in June, 2013.

15. UML TESTING PROFILE IN
MODELIOSAAS VM WORKGROUP

16. MODELIOSAAS PHP UNIT TESTS
EXECUTED IN MODELIOSAAS.

17. USER-FRIENDLINESS OF THE
MODELING ENVIRONMENT
The Modelio UTP Profile implementation
includes all the OMG UML Testing Profile
stereotypes and all the feedback received
from the FITTEST consortium to include
proper specific commands within the
Modelio 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 unexpected
ways that users use the Modelio SaaS services .
 FI Applications Asynchronous interactions
 UTP Modeling and Fittest continuous testing ITE
environment.

19. THANKS!
 Alessandra Bagnato
Softeam R&D, alessandra.bagnato@softeam.fr
 FITTEST: EU FP7 Project
 https://www.facebook.com/FITTESTproject
 RCIS 2013 _ Industrial Day Paris 31st May 2013
 http://rcis-conf.com/rcis2013/document/INDUSTRIALDAY_RCIS2013.pdf
 Modelio Web Site:
 http:// www.modelio.org
 Modelio UML Testing Profile :
 http://www.modeliosoft.com/en/modelio-store/modules/modeling-exte