Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Software Testing Techniques Revisited for OWL Ontologies

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Model-Driven Engineering and Software Development (MODELSWARD 2016)

Part of the book series: Communications in Computer and Information Science ((CCIS,volume 692))

Abstract

Ontologies are an essential component of semantic knowledge bases and applications, and nowadays they are used in a plethora of domains. Despite the maturity of ontology languages, support tools and engineering techniques, the testing and validation of ontologies is a field which still lacks consolidated approaches and tools. This paper attempts at partly bridging that gap, taking a first step towards the extension of some traditional software testing techniques to ontologies expressed in a widely-used format. Mutation testing and coverage testing, revisited in the light of the peculiar features of the ontology language and structure, can can assist in designing better test suites to validate them, and overall help in the engineering and refinement of ontologies and software based on them.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    https://maven.apache.org/.

  2. 2.

    http://owlapi.sourceforge.net/.

  3. 3.

    http://jfact.sourceforge.net/.

  4. 4.

    https://jena.apache.org/.

  5. 5.

    https://github.com/guerret/lu.uni.owl.mutatingowls.

  6. 6.

    http://protege.stanford.edu/ontologies/pizza/pizza.owl.

  7. 7.

    https://code.google.com/p/twouse/wiki/SPARQLASExamples.

References

  1. Quillian, M.R.: Word concepts: a theory and simulation of some basic semantic capabilities. Behav. Sci. 12, 410–430 (1967)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. World Wide Web Consortium (W3C): RDF 1.1 concepts and abstract syntax (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  3. World Wide Web Consortium (W3C): OWL 2 Web Ontology Language document overview, 2nd edn. (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Antoniou, G., van Harmelen, F.: Web Ontology Language: OWL. In: Staab, S., Studer, R. (eds.) Handbook on Ontologies. International Handbooks on Information Systems, pp. 67–92. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Horrocks, I.: DAML+OIL: a description logic for the semantic web. Bull. Tech. Committee Data Eng. 25, 4–9 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Horrocks, I.: What are ontologies good for? In: Küppers, B.O., Hahn, U., Artmann, S. (eds.) Evolution of Semantic Systems, pp. 175–188. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Rospocher, M., Serafini, L.: An ontological framework for decision support. In: Takeda, H., Qu, Y., Mizoguchi, R., Kitamura, Y. (eds.) JIST 2012. LNCS, vol. 7774, pp. 239–254. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-37996-3_16

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Kershenbaum, A., Fokoue, A., Patel, C., Welty, C., Schonberg, E., Cimino, J., Ma, L., Srinivas, K., Schloss, R., Murdock, J.W.: A view of OWL from the field: use cases and experiences. In: Cuenca Grau, B., Hitzler, P., Shankey, C., Wallace, E. (eds.) Proceedings of the Second Workshop on OWL: Experiences and Directions (OWLED), vol. 216. CEUR Workshop Proceedings (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Blomqvist, E., Seil Sepour, A., Presutti, V.: Ontology testing - methodology and tool. In: Teije, A., Völker, J., Handschuh, S., Stuckenschmidt, H., d’Acquin, M., Nikolov, A., Aussenac-Gilles, N., Hernandez, N. (eds.) EKAW 2012. LNCS, vol. 7603, pp. 216–226. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-33876-2_20

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. World Wide Web Consortium (W3C): OWL Web Ontology Language test cases (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Wang, H., Horridge, M., Rector, A., Drummond, N., Seidenberg, J.: Debugging OWL-DL ontologies: a heuristic approach. In: Gil, Y., Motta, E., Benjamins, V.R., Musen, M.A. (eds.) ISWC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3729, pp. 745–757. Springer, Heidelberg (2005). doi:10.1007/11574620_53

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. García-Ramos, S., Otero, A., Fernández-López, M.: OntologyTest: a tool to evaluate ontologies through tests defined by the user. In: Omatu, S., Rocha, M.P., Bravo, J., Fernández, F., Corchado, E., Bustillo, A., Corchado, J.M. (eds.) IWANN 2009. LNCS, vol. 5518, pp. 91–98. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-02481-8_13

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. McGuinness, D.L., Fikes, R., Rice, J., Wilder, S.: An environment for merging and testing large ontologies. In: Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 2000), pp. 483–493 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Gangemi, A., Catenacci, C., Ciaramita, M., Lehmann, J.: Modelling ontology evaluation and validation. In: Sure, Y., Domingue, J. (eds.) ESWC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4011, pp. 140–154. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). doi:10.1007/11762256_13

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Burton-Jones, A., Storey, V.C., Sugumaran, V., Ahluwalia, P.: A semiotic metrics suite for assessing the quality of ontologies. Data Knowl. Eng. 55, 84–102 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Ma, L., Yang, Y., Qiu, Z., Xie, G., Pan, Y., Liu, S.: Towards a complete OWL ontology benchmark. In: Sure, Y., Domingue, J. (eds.) ESWC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4011, pp. 125–139. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). doi:10.1007/11762256_12

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Guarino, N.: An overview of ontoclean. In: Staab, S., Studer, R. (eds.) Handbook on Ontologies. International Handbooks on Information Systems, 2nd edn, pp. 201–220. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Poveda-Villalón, M., Suárez-Figueroa, M.C., Gómez-Pérez, A.: Validating ontologies with OOPS!. In: Teije, A., Völker, J., Handschuh, S., Stuckenschmidt, H., d’Acquin, M., Nikolov, A., Aussenac-Gilles, N., Hernandez, N. (eds.) EKAW 2012. LNCS, vol. 7603, pp. 267–281. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-33876-2_24

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Poveda, M., Suárez-Figueroa, M.C., Gómez-Pérez, A.: Common pitfalls in ontology development. In: Meseguer, P., Mandow, L., Gasca, R.M. (eds.) CAEPIA 2009. LNCS, vol. 5988, pp. 91–100. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-14264-2_10

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. Vrandečić, D., Gangemi, A.: Unit tests for ontologies. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z., Herrero, P. (eds.) OTM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4278, pp. 1012–1020. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). doi:10.1007/11915072_2

    Google Scholar 

  21. Granitzer, M., Scharl, A., Weichselbraun, A., Neidhart, T., Juffinger, A., Wohlgenannt, G.: Automated ontology learning and validation using hypothesis testing. In: Wegrzyn-Wolska, K.M., Szczepaniak, P.S. (eds.) Advances in Intelligent Web Mastering. Advances in Soft Computing, vol. 43, pp. 130–135. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. Lee, S., Bai, X., Chen, Y.: Automatic mutation testing and simulation on OWL-S specified web services. In: Proceedings of the 41st Annual Simulation Symposium (ANSS), pp. 149–156. IEEE (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  23. World Wide Web Consortium (W3C): OWL-S: Semantic markup for web services (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Wang, Y., Bai, X., Li, J., Huang, R.: Ontology-based test case generation for testing web services. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium on Autonomous Decentralized Systems (ISADS), pp. 43–50 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  25. DeMillo, R.A., Lipton, R.J., Sayward, F.G.: Hints on test data selection: help for the practicing programmer. Computer 11, 34–41 (1978)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Hamlet, R.G.: Testing programs with the aid of a compiler. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. SE-3, 279–290 (1977)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Lipton, R.: Fault diagnosis of computer programs. Technical report. Carnegie Mellon University (1971)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Ammann, P., Offutt, A.J.: 5. In: Syntax-Based Testing, pp. 170–212. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Howden, W.E.: Weak mutation testing and completeness of test sets. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. SE-8, 371–379 (1982)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Jia, Y., Harman, M.: An analysis and survey of the development of mutation testing. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 37, 649–678 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Offutt, A.J.: A practical system for mutation testing: help for the common programmer. In: Proceedings of the International Test Conference (ITC). IEEE Computer Society, pp. 824–830 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Offutt, A.J., Untch, R.H.: Mutation 2000: Uniting the orthogonal. In: Wong, W.E. (ed.) Mutation Testing for the New Century. The Springer International Series on Advances in Database Systems, vol. 24, pp. 34–44. Springer, US (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  33. Bartolini, C., Bertolino, A., Marchetti, E., Parissis, I.: Data flow-based validation of web services compositions: perspectives and examples. In: Lemos, R., Giandomenico, F., Gacek, C., Muccini, H., Vieira, M. (eds.) WADS 2007. LNCS, vol. 5135, pp. 298–325. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). doi:10.1007/978-3-540-85571-2_13

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  34. Ma, Y.S., Offutt, A.J., Kwong, Y.R.: Mujava: an automated class mutation system. Softw. Test. Verification Reliab. 15, 97–133 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Offutt, A.J., Lee, A., Rothermel, G., Untch, R.H., Zapf, C.: An experimental determination of sufficient mutant operators. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. (TOSEM) 5, 99–118 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Offutt, A.J., Hayes, J.H.: A semantic model of program faults. SIGSOFT Softw. Eng. Notes 21, 195–200 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Mottu, J.-M., Baudry, B., Traon, Y.: Mutation analysis testing for model transformations. In: Rensink, A., Warmer, J. (eds.) ECMDA-FA 2006. LNCS, vol. 4066, pp. 376–390. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). doi:10.1007/11787044_28

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  38. Clark, J.A., Dan, H., Hierons, R.M.: Semantic mutation testing. In: Proceedings of the 3rd IEEE International Conference on Software Testing, Verification, and Validation Workshops (ICSTW), pp. 100–109. IEEE (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Horridge, M., Drummond, N., Goodwin, J., Rector, A., Stevens, R., Wang, H.H.: The manchester OWL syntax. In: OWL: Experiences and Directions Workshop (OWLED) (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Zhu, H., Hall, P.A.V., May, J.H.R.: Software unit test coverage and adequacy. ACM Comput. Surv. 29, 366–427 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Yang, Q., Jenny Li, J., Weiss, D.M.: A survey of coverage-based testing tools. Comput. J. 52, 589–597 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Ledgard, H.F., Marcotty, M.: A genealogy of control structures. Commun. ACM 18, 629–639 (1975)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  43. Huang, J.C.: An approach to program testing. ACM Comput. Surv. 7, 113–128 (1975)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  44. Chow, T.S.: Testing software design modeled by finite-state machines. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 4, 178–187 (1978)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  45. Osterweil, L.J.: Data flow analysis as an aid in documentation, assertion, generation, validation, and error detection. Technical Report CU-CS-055-74, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80302 (1974)

    Google Scholar 

  46. Ammann, P., Offutt, A.J.: 2. In: Graph Coverage, pp. 27–103. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  47. Tikir, M.M., Hollingsworth, J.K.: Efficient instrumentation for code coverage testing. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis (ISSTA), pp. 86–96 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  48. Ammann, P., Offutt, A.J.: 8. In: Building Testing Tools, pp. 268–279. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  49. Bartolini, C., Muthuri, R.: Reconciling data protection rights and obligations: an ontology of the forthcoming EU regulation. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Language and Semantic Technology for Legal Domain (LST4LD), Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing (RANLP) (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  50. Bartolini, C., Muthuri, R., Santos, C.: Using ontologies to model data protection requirements in workflows. In: Proceedings of the Ninth International Workshop on Juris-informatics (JURISIN), pp. 27–40 (2015). Extended version to be published in LNAI book

    Google Scholar 

  51. Reding, V.: The upcoming data protection reform for the European Union. International Data Privacy Law (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  52. Rodríguez-Doncel, V., Santos, C., Casanovas, P.: A model of air transport passenger incidents and rights. In: Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems (JURIX), pp. 55–60. IOS Press (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  53. Rodríguez-Doncel, V., Santos, C., Casanovas, P.: Ontology-driven legal support-system in the air transport passenger domain. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Semantic Web for the Law (SW4Law) (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  54. World Wide Web Consortium (W3C): RDF 1.1 Turtle (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  55. World Wide Web Consortium (W3C): Sparql query language for rdf (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  56. Bartolini, C.: Mutating OWLs: semantic mutation testing for ontologies. In: Proceedings of the workshop on domAin specific Model-based AppRoaches to vErificaTion and validaTiOn (AMARETTO), pp. 43–53 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Interdisciplinary Centre for Security, Reliability and Trust (SnT), Université du Luxembourg, Luxembourg, Luxembourg

    Cesare Bartolini

Authors
  1. Cesare Bartolini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cesare Bartolini .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Université d’Angers/ESEO, Angers, France

    Slimane Hammoudi

  2. Faculty of EEMCS, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands

    Luís Ferreira Pires

  3. Malina Software Corp., Nepean, Ontario, Canada

    Bran Selic

  4. SOFTEAM, Paris, France

    Philippe Desfray

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

Bartolini, C. (2017). Software Testing Techniques Revisited for OWL Ontologies. In: Hammoudi, S., Pires, L., Selic, B., Desfray, P. (eds) Model-Driven Engineering and Software Development. MODELSWARD 2016. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 692. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66302-9_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66302-9_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-66301-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-66302-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation