The software of robotic assistants needs to be verified, to ensure its safety and functional correctness. Testing in simulation allows a high degree of realism in the verification. However, generating tests that cover both interesting foreseen and unforeseen scenarios in human-robot interaction (HRI) tasks, while executing most of the code, remains a challenge. We propose the use of belief-desire-intention (BDI) agents in the test environment, to increase the level of realism and human-like stimulation of simulated robots. Artificial intelligence, such as agent theory, can be exploited for more intelligent test generation. An automated testbench was implemented for a simulation in Robot Operating System (ROS) and Gazebo, of a cooperative table assembly task between a humanoid robot and a person. Requirements were verified for this task, and some unexpected design issues were discovered, leading to possible code improvements. Our results highlight the practicality of BDI agents to automatically generate valid and human-like tests to get high code coverage, compared to hand-written directed tests, pseudorandom generation, and other variants of model-based test generation. Also, BDI agents allow the coverage of combined behaviours of the HRI system with more ease than writing temporal logic properties for model checking.
Other model-based approaches seek to test models at the same level of abstraction as the model-based test generation @cite_5 , or they focus on testing high-level functionality @cite_23 @cite_28 @cite_13 . Thus, test generation is much easier to implement than for our testing problem, which targets the real robotics code in HRI realistic scenarios. Our model-based test generation approach is based on divide-and-conquer, simplifying the constraint solving or search problem. This abstract-concrete process has been proposed for the synthesis of hybrid controllers that satisfy properties @cite_17 @cite_27 .
@cite_28 @cite_27 @cite_23 @cite_5 @cite_13 @cite_17
2301698066 2036657965 2092422674 2495715420
Industries such as flexible manufacturing and home care will be transformed by the presence of robotic assistants. Assurance of safety and functional soundness for these robotic systems will require rigorous verification and validation. We propose testing in simulation using Coverage-Driven Verification (CDV) to guide the testing process in an automatic and systematic way. We use a two-tiered test generation approach, where abstract test sequences are computed first and then concretized (e.g., data and variables are instantiated), to reduce the complexity of the test generation problem. To demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach, we developed a testbench for robotic code, running in ROS-Gazebo, that implements an object handover as part of a human-robot interaction (HRI) task. Tests are generated to stimulate the robot’s code in a realistic manner, through stimulating the human, environment, sensors, and actuators in simulation. We compare the merits of unconstrained, constrained and model-based test generation in achieving thorough exploration of the code under test, and interesting combinations of human-robot interactions. Our results show that CDV combined with systematic test generation achieves a very high degree of automation in simulation-based verification of control code for robots in HRI. Search-based test-data generation has proved successful for code-level testing but almost no search-based work has been carried out at higher levels of abstraction. In this paper the application of such approaches at the higher levels of abstraction offered by MATLAB Simulink models is investigated and a wide-ranging framework for test-data generation and management is presented. Model-level analogues of code-level structural coverage criteria are presented and search-based approaches to achieving them are described. The paper also describes the first search-based approach to the generation of mutant-killing test data, addressing a fundamental limitation of mutation testing. Some problems remain whatever the level of abstraction considered. In particular, complexity introduced by the presence of persistent state when generating test sequences is as much a challenge at the Simulink model level as it has been found to be at the code level. The framework addresses this problem. Finally, a flexible approach to test sub-set extraction is presented, allowing testing resources to be deployed effectively and efficiently. The idea of model-based testing is to compare the I O behavior of an explicit behavior model with that of a system under test. This requires the model to be valid. If the model is a simplification of the SUT, then it is easier to check the model and use it for subsequent test case generation than to directly check the SUT. In this case, the different levels of abstraction must be bridged. Not surprisingly, experience shows that choosing the right level of abstraction is crucial to the success of model-based testing. We argue that models for specification purposes, models for test generation, and models for full code generation are likely to be different. The paper classifies and discusses different abstractions. It is intended as a step towards guidelines for those who build behavior models to the end of testing. In engineering of safety critical systems, regulatory standards often put requirements on both traceable specification-based testing, and structural coverage on program units. Automated test generation techniques can be used to generate inputs to cover the structural aspects of a program. However, there is no conclusive evidence on how automated test generation compares to manual test design, or how testing based on the program implementation relates to specification-based testing. In this paper, we investigate specification -- and implementation-based testing of embedded software written in the IEC 61131-3 language, a programming standard used in many embedded safety critical software systems. Further, we measure the efficiency and effectiveness in terms of fault detection. For this purpose, a controlled experiment was conducted, comparing tests created by a total of twenty-three software engineering master students. The participants worked individually on manually designing and automatically generating tests for two IEC 61131-3 programs. Tests created by the participants in the experiment were collected and analyzed in terms of mutation score, decision coverage, number of tests, and testing duration. We found that, when compared to implementation-based testing, specification-based testing yields significantly more effective tests in terms of the number of faults detected. Specifically, specification-based tests more effectively detect comparison and value replacement type of faults, compared to implementation-based tests. On the other hand, implementation-based automated test generation leads to fewer tests (up to 85 improvement) created in shorter time than the ones manually created based on the specification.