Multiversion software reliability through fault-avoidance and fault-tolerance

In this project we have proposed to investigate a number of experimental and theoretical issues associated with the practical use of multi-version software in providing dependable software through fault-avoidance and fault-elimination, as well as run-time tolerance of software faults. In the period reported here we have working on the following: We have continued collection of data on the relationships between software faults and reliability, and the coverage provided by the testing process as measured by different metrics (including data flow metrics). We continued work on software reliability estimation methods based on non-random sampling, and the relationship between software reliability and code coverage provided through testing. We have continued studying back-to-back testing as an efficient mechanism for removal of uncorrelated faults, and common-cause faults of variable span. We have also been studying back-to-back testing as a tool for improvement of the software change process, including regression testing. We continued investigating existing, and worked on formulation of new fault-tolerance models. In particular, we have partly finished evaluation of Consensus Voting in the presence of correlated failures, and are in the process of finishing evaluation of Consensus Recovery Block (CRB) under failure correlation. We find both approaches far superior to commonly employed fixed agreement number voting (usually majority voting). We have also finished a cost analysis of the CRB approach

Test Set Diameter: Quantifying the Diversity of Sets of Test Cases

A common and natural intuition among software testers is that test cases need to differ if a software system is to be tested properly and its quality ensured. Consequently, much research has gone into formulating distance measures for how test cases, their inputs and/or their outputs differ. However, common to these proposals is that they are data type specific and/or calculate the diversity only between pairs of test inputs, traces or outputs. We propose a new metric to measure the diversity of sets of tests: the test set diameter (TSDm). It extends our earlier, pairwise test diversity metrics based on recent advances in information theory regarding the calculation of the normalized compression distance (NCD) for multisets. An advantage is that TSDm can be applied regardless of data type and on any test-related information, not only the test inputs. A downside is the increased computational time compared to competing approaches. Our experiments on four different systems show that the test set diameter can help select test sets with higher structural and fault coverage than random selection even when only applied to test inputs. This can enable early test design and selection, prior to even having a software system to test, and complement other types of test automation and analysis. We argue that this quantification of test set diversity creates a number of opportunities to better understand software quality and provides practical ways to increase it.Comment: In submissio

Is the Stack Distance Between Test Case and Method Correlated With Test Effectiveness?

Mutation testing is a means to assess the effectiveness of a test suite and its outcome is considered more meaningful than code coverage metrics. However, despite several optimizations, mutation testing requires a significant computational effort and has not been widely adopted in industry. Therefore, we study in this paper whether test effectiveness can be approximated using a more light-weight approach. We hypothesize that a test case is more likely to detect faults in methods that are close to the test case on the call stack than in methods that the test case accesses indirectly through many other methods. Based on this hypothesis, we propose the minimal stack distance between test case and method as a new test measure, which expresses how close any test case comes to a given method, and study its correlation with test effectiveness. We conducted an empirical study with 21 open-source projects, which comprise in total 1.8 million LOC, and show that a correlation exists between stack distance and test effectiveness. The correlation reaches a strength up to 0.58. We further show that a classifier using the minimal stack distance along with additional easily computable measures can predict the mutation testing result of a method with 92.9% precision and 93.4% recall. Hence, such a classifier can be taken into consideration as a light-weight alternative to mutation testing or as a preceding, less costly step to that.Comment: EASE 201

Evaluating Random Mutant Selection at Class-Level in Projects with Non-Adequate Test Suites

Mutation testing is a standard technique to evaluate the quality of a test suite. Due to its computationally intensive nature, many approaches have been proposed to make this technique feasible in real case scenarios. Among these approaches, uniform random mutant selection has been demonstrated to be simple and promising. However, works on this area analyze mutant samples at project level mainly on projects with adequate test suites. In this paper, we fill this lack of empirical validation by analyzing random mutant selection at class level on projects with non-adequate test suites. First, we show that uniform random mutant selection underachieves the expected results. Then, we propose a new approach named weighted random mutant selection which generates more representative mutant samples. Finally, we show that representative mutant samples are larger for projects with high test adequacy.Comment: EASE 2016, Article 11 , 10 page

Experiments in fault tolerant software reliability

The reliability of voting was evaluated in a fault-tolerant software system for small output spaces. The effectiveness of the back-to-back testing process was investigated. Version 3.0 of the RSDIMU-ATS, a semi-automated test bed for certification testing of RSDIMU software, was prepared and distributed. Software reliability estimation methods based on non-random sampling are being studied. The investigation of existing fault-tolerance models was continued and formulation of new models was initiated

Experiments in fault tolerant software reliability

Twenty functionally equivalent programs were built and tested in a multiversion software experiment. Following unit testing, all programs were subjected to an extensive system test. In the process sixty-one distinct faults were identified among the versions. Less than 12 percent of the faults exhibited varying degrees of positive correlation. The common-cause (or similar) faults spanned as many as 14 components. However, a majority of these faults were trivial, and easily detected by proper unit and/or system testing. Only two of the seven similar faults were difficult faults, and both were caused by specification ambiguities. One of these faults exhibited variable identical-and-wrong response span, i.e. response span which varied with the testing conditions and input data. Techniques that could have been used to avoid the faults are discussed. For example, it was determined that back-to-back testing of 2-tuples could have been used to eliminate about 90 percent of the faults. In addition, four of the seven similar faults could have been detected by using back-to-back testing of 5-tuples. It is believed that most, if not all, similar faults could have been avoided had the specifications been written using more formal notation, the unit testing phase was subject to more stringent standards and controls, and better tools for measuring the quality and adequacy of the test data (e.g. coverage) were used

Software Engineering Laboratory (SEL) report to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Software development predictors, error analysis, reliability models and software metric analysis are studied. The use of dynamic characteristics as predictors for software development is also studied