![]() It subsumes functional coverage and structural coverage for both unit testing and unit proof. This paper fills this gap between test and proof by introducing a new notion of verification coverage based on mutation coverage. ![]() In practice, this prevents the verification engineer from combining test and automatic proof to verify low-level requirements of a common piece of code in order to mitigate the verification cost. However, there is no shared method for test and proof to measure structural coverage. In this context, the verification engineer must assess sufficient coverage of both code (structural coverage) and specification (functional coverage). ![]() avionics) are currently based on either unit testing or unit proof to verify that a function satisfies its low-level requirements in order to be compliant with the highest certification levels (e.g. The V&V practices of safety-critical industries (e.g. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |