Software Engineering-Equivalence Partitioning

Equivalence partitioning is a black-box testing method that divides the input domain of a program into classes of data from which test case...

Equivalence partitioning is a black-box testing method that divides the input domain of a program into classes of data from which test cases can be derived. An ideal test case single-handedly uncovers a class of errors (e.g., incorrect processing of all character data) that might otherwise require many cases to be executed before the general error is observed. Equivalence partitioning strives to define a test case that uncovers classes of errors, thereby reducing the total number of test cases that must be developed.
Test case design for equivalence partitioning is based on an evaluation of equivalence classes for an input condition. Using concepts , if a set of objects can be linked by relationships that are symmetric, transitive, and reflexive, an equivalence class is present . An equivalence class represents a set of valid or invalid states for input conditions. Typically, an input condition is either a specific numeric value, a range of values, a set of related values, or a Boolean condition. Equivalence classes may be defined according to the following guidelines:

1. If an input condition specifies a range, one valid and two invalid equivalence classes are defined.
2. If an input condition requires a specific value, one valid and two invalid equivalence classes are defined.
3. If an input condition specifies a member of a set, one valid and one invalid equivalence class are defined.
4. If an input condition is Boolean, one valid and one invalid class are defined.

As an example, consider data maintained as part of an automated banking application. The user can access the bank using a personal computer, provide a six-digit password, and follow with a series of typed commands that trigger various banking functions. During the log-on sequence, the software supplied for the banking application accepts data in the form

area code—blank or three-digit number
prefix—three-digit number not beginning with 0 or 1
suffix—four-digit number
password—six digit alphanumeric string
commands—check, deposit, bill pay, and the like

The input conditions associated with each data element for the banking application can be specified as
area code: Input condition, Boolean—the area code may or may not be present. 
                   Input condition, range—values defined between 200 and 999, with specific exceptions.
prefix: Input condition, range—specified value >200
            Input condition, value—four-digit length
password: Input condition, Boolean—a password may or may not be present.
                  Input condition, value—six-character string.
command: Input condition, set—containing commands noted previously.

Applying the guidelines for the derivation of equivalence classes, test cases for each input domain data item can be developed and executed. Test cases are selected so that the largest number of attributes of an equivalence class are exercised at once.

Boundary Value Analysis

For reasons that are not completely clear, a greater number of errors tends to occur at the boundaries of the input domain rather than in the "center." It is for this reason that boundary value analysis (BVA) has been developed as a testing technique. Boundary value analysis leads to a selection of test cases that exercise bounding values.
Boundary value analysis is a test case design technique that complements equivalence partitioning. Rather than selecting any element of an equivalence class, BVA leads to the selection of test cases at the "edges" of the class. Rather than focusing solely on input conditions, BVA derives test cases from the output domain as well .

Guidelines for BVA are similar in many respects to those provided for equivalence partitioning:
1. If an input condition specifies a range bounded by values a and b, test cases should be designed with values a and b and just above and just below a and b.
2. If an input condition specifies a number of values, test cases should be developed that exercise the minimum and maximum numbers. Values just above and below minimum and maximum are also tested.
3. Apply guidelines 1 and 2 to output conditions. For example, assume that a temperature vs. pressure table is required as output from an engineering analysis program. Test cases should be designed to create an output report that produces the maximum (and minimum) allowable number of table entries.
4. If internal program data structures have prescribed boundaries (e.g., an array has a defined limit of 100 entries), be certain to design a test case to exercise the data structure at its boundary.

Most software engineers intuitively perform BVA to some degree. By applying these guidelines, boundary testing will be more complete, thereby having a higher likelihood for error detection.

Comparison Testing

There are some situations (e.g., aircraft avionics, automobile braking systems) in which the reliability of software is absolutely critical. In such applications redundant hardware and software are often used to minimize the possibility of error. When redundant software is developed, separate software engineering teams develop independent versions of an application using the same specification. In such situations, each version can be tested with the same test data to ensure that all provide identical output. Then all versions are executed in parallel with real-time comparison of results to ensure consistency.
Using lessons learned from redundant systems, researchers have suggested that independent  ersions of software be developed for critical applications, even when only a single version will be used in the delivered computer-based system. These independent versions form the basis of a black-box testing technique called comparison testing or back-to-back testing .

When multiple implementations of the same specification have been produced, test cases designed using other black-box techniques (e.g., equivalence partitioning) are provided as input to each version of the software. If the output from each version is the same, it is assumed that all implementations are correct. If the output is different, each of the applications is investigated to determine if a defect in one or more versions is responsible for the difference. In most cases, the comparison of outputs can be performed by an automated tool.

Comparison testing is not foolproof. If the specification from which all versions have been developed is in error, all versions will likely reflect the error. In addition, if each of the independent versions produces identical but incorrect results, condition testing will fail to detect the error.

Best Online Tutorials | Source codes | Programming Languages: Software Engineering-Equivalence Partitioning
Software Engineering-Equivalence Partitioning
Best Online Tutorials | Source codes | Programming Languages
Loaded All Posts Not found any posts VIEW ALL Readmore Reply Cancel reply Delete By Home PAGES POSTS View All RECOMMENDED FOR YOU LABEL ARCHIVE SEARCH ALL POSTS Not found any post match with your request Back Home Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat January February March April May June July August September October November December Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec just now 1 minute ago $$1$$ minutes ago 1 hour ago $$1$$ hours ago Yesterday $$1$$ days ago $$1$$ weeks ago more than 5 weeks ago Followers Follow THIS PREMIUM CONTENT IS LOCKED STEP 1: Share to a social network STEP 2: Click the link on your social network Copy All Code Select All Code All codes were copied to your clipboard Can not copy the codes / texts, please press [CTRL]+[C] (or CMD+C with Mac) to copy Table of Content