【正文】 sting the application. The drawbacks are, this technique is used for only testing GUI application and cannot used in web applications, Fault injection or seeding technique, which is used to evaluate the efficiency of the method used is not applied here. Figure 4. Crash Testing Process . Rapidly Evolving Software Atif M. Memon et al [10], made several contributions in the area of GUI smoke testing in terms of GUI smoke test suites, their size, fault detection ability and test oracle. Daily Automated Regression Tester (DART) framework is used to automate GUI smoke testing. Developers work on the code during day time and DART automatically launches the Application Under Test (AUT) during night time, builds it and runs GUI smoke tests. Coverage and error report are mailed to developer. In DART all the process such as Analyzing the AUT’s GUI structure using GUI ripper, Test case generation, Test oracle generation, Test case executor, Examining the reports and unsuccessful test cases, Submitting bug reports are automated. GUI smoke test cases and test oracles are generated. Fault seeding is used to evaluate fault detection techniques used. An adequate number of faults of each fault type are seeded fairly. The disadvantages are Some part of code are missed by smoke tests, Some of the bugs reported by DART are false positive, Overall effectiveness of DART depends on GUI ripper capabilities, Not available for industry based application testing, Faults that are not manifested on the GUI will go undetected 5. INCORPORATING EVENT CONTEXT Xun Yuan et al [1], developed a new criterion for GUI testing. They used a binatorial interaction testing technique. The main motivation of using binatorial interaction is to incorporate context and it also considers event binations, sequence length and include all possible event. Graph models are used and covering array is used to generate test cases which are the basis for binatorial interaction testing. A tool called GUITAR (GUI Testing Framework) is used for testing and this provides functionalities like generate test cases, execute test cases, verify correctness and obtain coverage reports. Initially using GUI ripper, a GUI application is converted into event graph and then the events are grouped depending on functionality and constraints are identified. Covering array is generated and test sequences are produced. Test cases are generated and executed. Finally coverage is puted and a test adequacy criterion is analyzed. The advantages are: contexts are incorporated, detects more faults when pared to the previous techniques used. The disadvantages are infeasible test cases make some test cases unexecutable, grouping events and identifying constraints are not automated. Figure 5. Testing Process 6. CONCLUSIONS In this paper, some of the various test case generation methods and various types of GUI testing adapted for different GUI applications and techniques are studied. Different approaches are being used under various testing environment. This study helps to choose the test case generation technique based on the requirements of the testing and it also helps to choose the type of GUI test to perform based on the application type such as open source software, industrial software and the software in which changes are checked in rapidly and continuously. REFERENCES [1] [2] Xun Yuan, Myra B. Cohen, Atif M. Memon, (2021) “GUI Interaction Testing: Incorporating Event Context”, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 99. A. M. Memon, M. E. Pollack, and M. L. Soffa, (2021) “Hierarchical GUI test case generation using automated planning”, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 144 155. X. Yuan and A. M. Memon, (2021) “Using GUI runtime state as feedback to generate test cases”, in International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), pp. 396405. X. Yuan, M. Cohen, and A. M. Memon, (2021) “Covering array sampling of input event sequences for automated GUI testing”, in International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE), pp. 405408. X. Yuan, M. Cohen, and A. M. Memon, (2021) “Towards dynamic adaptive automated test generation for graphical user interfaces”, in First International Workshop on TESTing Techniques amp。隨著時(shí)間的推移，測(cè)試 GUI 的復(fù)雜性不斷增加。 關(guān)鍵字 GUI 測(cè)試，基于模型的測(cè)試，測(cè)試用例，自動(dòng)化測(cè)試，事件測(cè)試。即使圖形用戶界面提供了用戶使用軟件的簡(jiǎn)單方法，但是它們會(huì)使開發(fā)過(guò)程的軟件復(fù)雜化。 GUI 測(cè)試可以由人類手動(dòng)或通過(guò)自動(dòng)化的方法自動(dòng)執(zhí)行。自動(dòng)化 GUI 測(cè)試高效、精確、可靠和低成本。測(cè)試套件包含詳細(xì)的指引或測(cè)試用例的每個(gè)集合的目標(biāo)。 EIG 包含與 GUI 應(yīng)用程序的業(yè)務(wù)邏輯進(jìn)行交互的事件。為進(jìn)行測(cè)試的應(yīng)用程序生成事件交互圖 (EIG) 和雙向交互的 GUI 事件生成的種子測(cè)試套件。新生成的測(cè)試案例都經(jīng)過(guò)測(cè)試，并附加故障檢測(cè)。此方法被設(shè)計(jì)的重點(diǎn)在 GUI 應(yīng)用程序。 圖 GUI運(yùn)行時(shí)間生成測(cè)試用例作為反饋 、使用覆蓋陣列技術(shù) Xun Yuan 提出一種新的 GUI 測(cè)試使用覆蓋陣列 (CA) 的測(cè)試用例生成 自動(dòng)化技術(shù)。使用這種技術(shù)生成測(cè)試序列，在特定范圍的強(qiáng)度下系統(tǒng)的采樣。長(zhǎng) 時(shí)間的生成測(cè)試用例使用覆蓋陣列抽樣。 生成事件交互圖和種子測(cè)試套件 執(zhí)行種子測(cè)試套件，記錄 GUI 運(yùn)行時(shí)間 生成 事件語(yǔ)義交互圖 執(zhí)行測(cè)試用例 測(cè)試報(bào)告 GUI 應(yīng)用程序 圖 、 動(dòng)態(tài)適應(yīng)測(cè)試自動(dòng)生成 Xun Yuan 建議一種生成測(cè)試套件不太可行的測(cè)試用例和更高的事件交互覆蓋算法。由 ESI 生成事件語(yǔ)義的交互圖。決定代碼覆蓋和標(biāo)識(shí)不被執(zhí)行的測(cè)試用例。 缺點(diǎn)是事件的上下文不合為一體，需要覆蓋和測(cè)試充分，判斷這些是如 何影GUI 應(yīng)用程序 生成事件交互模型 區(qū)分 GUI 事件 確定約束條件 由覆蓋陣列生成最大序列 生成可執(zhí)行的事件序列 執(zhí)行測(cè)試用例 事件交互缺失？ 測(cè)試報(bào)告 響故障檢測(cè)。圖模型用于作為輸入，如 EFG、 EIG、 ESIG 和翻錄的 GUI 結(jié)構(gòu)。這些傳遞回控制器和測(cè)試套件修復(fù)階段開始。如果存在不可行的測(cè)試用例，然后開始修復(fù)階段。 優(yōu)點(diǎn)是，它會(huì)在更長(zhǎng)時(shí)間的測(cè)試序列上更好地生成覆蓋范圍較小的測(cè)試套件。 各種應(yīng)用程序的 GUI 測(cè)試 4． 工業(yè)圖形用戶界面系統(tǒng) Penelope Brooks 開發(fā) GUI 測(cè)試方法發(fā)展相關(guān)的工業(yè)應(yīng)用程序，提高測(cè)試系統(tǒng)整體素質(zhì)，它通過(guò)描述 GUI 界面，使用收集的數(shù)據(jù)檢測(cè)缺陷，是測(cè)試人員和研究人員協(xié)助發(fā)展中更有