Toward automatic detection of software failures
To date, no method has explicitly and cost effectively dealt with failure detection in software systems whose specifications are nondeterministic. In such systems, the specification permits multiple outputs for the same input sequence and system state. Nondeterminism in specifications is advantageou...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Computer (Long Beach, Calif.) Calif.), 1998-08, Vol.31 (8), p.68-74 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext bestellen |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 74 |
---|---|
container_issue | 8 |
container_start_page | 68 |
container_title | Computer (Long Beach, Calif.) |
container_volume | 31 |
creator | Savor, T. Seviora, R.E. |
description | To date, no method has explicitly and cost effectively dealt with failure detection in software systems whose specifications are nondeterministic. In such systems, the specification permits multiple outputs for the same input sequence and system state. Nondeterminism in specifications is advantageous because the specification writer can avoid stating irrelevant behavior as mandatory, freeing the software designer to choose a behavioral alternative that would yield a more desirable implementation. Unfortunately, this flexibility comes at a cost to the failure detection mechanism. It must accommodate all the target system's legal behavioral alternatives and avoid favoring one of them. The article describes a hierarchical supervisor whose failure detection mechanism explicitly addresses systems with nondeterministic specifications. The supervisor, a unit separate from the target system, observes the system's external inputs and outputs and reports any failures. Its hierarchical structure results from splitting the task of identifying the behavioral alternative the target system chooses from the task of checking the details of system behavior. This structure makes it possible to efficiently trade off detection accuracy and computational cost. To evaluate their approach, the authors created a prototype supervisor and used it to supervise the execution of the control program of a small telephone exchange. Results indicate that the hierarchical supervisor can significantly reduce the computational cost of considering the target system's behavioral alternatives. However, although the supervisor's computational cost is significantly reduced, it is still higher than that for the target system. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1109/2.707619 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_RIE</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_ieee_primary_707619</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ieee_id>707619</ieee_id><sourcerecordid>26848215</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c387t-2a44dc220c82ed0779c6aad6d379087a5f8281378423db226da695d21d2425cf3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqF0MtLAzEQBvAgCtYqePa0eBAv2yaT1-xRxBcUvNRziHnAlm1Tk13E_96VLR68eBqG-fHBfIRcMrpgjDZLWGiqFWuOyIxJiTVFJo7JjFKGdcMUnJKzUjbjKlDyGVmu06fNvrJDn7a2b13lQx9c36ZdlWJVUuzHe6iibbshh3JOTqLtSrg4zDl5e3xY3z_Xq9enl_u7Ve046r4GK4R3ANQhBE-1bpyy1ivPdUNRWxkRkHGNArh_B1DeqkZ6YB4ESBf5nNxMufucPoZQerNtiwtdZ3chDcUAIjZa4P9QoUBgcoTXf-AmDXk3PmHYmMSZBjqi2wm5nErJIZp9brc2fxlGzU-_BszU70ivJtqGEH7Z4fgNnpdy0Q</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>197431720</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Toward automatic detection of software failures</title><source>IEEE Electronic Library (IEL)</source><creator>Savor, T. ; Seviora, R.E.</creator><creatorcontrib>Savor, T. ; Seviora, R.E.</creatorcontrib><description>To date, no method has explicitly and cost effectively dealt with failure detection in software systems whose specifications are nondeterministic. In such systems, the specification permits multiple outputs for the same input sequence and system state. Nondeterminism in specifications is advantageous because the specification writer can avoid stating irrelevant behavior as mandatory, freeing the software designer to choose a behavioral alternative that would yield a more desirable implementation. Unfortunately, this flexibility comes at a cost to the failure detection mechanism. It must accommodate all the target system's legal behavioral alternatives and avoid favoring one of them. The article describes a hierarchical supervisor whose failure detection mechanism explicitly addresses systems with nondeterministic specifications. The supervisor, a unit separate from the target system, observes the system's external inputs and outputs and reports any failures. Its hierarchical structure results from splitting the task of identifying the behavioral alternative the target system chooses from the task of checking the details of system behavior. This structure makes it possible to efficiently trade off detection accuracy and computational cost. To evaluate their approach, the authors created a prototype supervisor and used it to supervise the execution of the control program of a small telephone exchange. Results indicate that the hierarchical supervisor can significantly reduce the computational cost of considering the target system's behavioral alternatives. However, although the supervisor's computational cost is significantly reduced, it is still higher than that for the target system.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0018-9162</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1558-0814</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1109/2.707619</identifier><identifier>CODEN: CPTRB4</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: IEEE</publisher><subject>Automatic testing ; Costs ; Delay ; Failure analysis ; Law ; Legal factors ; Product testing ; Signal generators ; Software ; Software systems ; Software testing ; Specifications ; System testing ; Telephony</subject><ispartof>Computer (Long Beach, Calif.), 1998-08, Vol.31 (8), p.68-74</ispartof><rights>Copyright Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE) Aug 1998</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c387t-2a44dc220c82ed0779c6aad6d379087a5f8281378423db226da695d21d2425cf3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c387t-2a44dc220c82ed0779c6aad6d379087a5f8281378423db226da695d21d2425cf3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/707619$$EHTML$$P50$$Gieee$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,793,27905,27906,54739</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttps://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/707619$$EView_record_in_IEEE$$FView_record_in_$$GIEEE</linktorsrc></links><search><creatorcontrib>Savor, T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seviora, R.E.</creatorcontrib><title>Toward automatic detection of software failures</title><title>Computer (Long Beach, Calif.)</title><addtitle>MC</addtitle><description>To date, no method has explicitly and cost effectively dealt with failure detection in software systems whose specifications are nondeterministic. In such systems, the specification permits multiple outputs for the same input sequence and system state. Nondeterminism in specifications is advantageous because the specification writer can avoid stating irrelevant behavior as mandatory, freeing the software designer to choose a behavioral alternative that would yield a more desirable implementation. Unfortunately, this flexibility comes at a cost to the failure detection mechanism. It must accommodate all the target system's legal behavioral alternatives and avoid favoring one of them. The article describes a hierarchical supervisor whose failure detection mechanism explicitly addresses systems with nondeterministic specifications. The supervisor, a unit separate from the target system, observes the system's external inputs and outputs and reports any failures. Its hierarchical structure results from splitting the task of identifying the behavioral alternative the target system chooses from the task of checking the details of system behavior. This structure makes it possible to efficiently trade off detection accuracy and computational cost. To evaluate their approach, the authors created a prototype supervisor and used it to supervise the execution of the control program of a small telephone exchange. Results indicate that the hierarchical supervisor can significantly reduce the computational cost of considering the target system's behavioral alternatives. However, although the supervisor's computational cost is significantly reduced, it is still higher than that for the target system.</description><subject>Automatic testing</subject><subject>Costs</subject><subject>Delay</subject><subject>Failure analysis</subject><subject>Law</subject><subject>Legal factors</subject><subject>Product testing</subject><subject>Signal generators</subject><subject>Software</subject><subject>Software systems</subject><subject>Software testing</subject><subject>Specifications</subject><subject>System testing</subject><subject>Telephony</subject><issn>0018-9162</issn><issn>1558-0814</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1998</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>RIE</sourceid><recordid>eNqF0MtLAzEQBvAgCtYqePa0eBAv2yaT1-xRxBcUvNRziHnAlm1Tk13E_96VLR68eBqG-fHBfIRcMrpgjDZLWGiqFWuOyIxJiTVFJo7JjFKGdcMUnJKzUjbjKlDyGVmu06fNvrJDn7a2b13lQx9c36ZdlWJVUuzHe6iibbshh3JOTqLtSrg4zDl5e3xY3z_Xq9enl_u7Ve046r4GK4R3ANQhBE-1bpyy1ivPdUNRWxkRkHGNArh_B1DeqkZ6YB4ESBf5nNxMufucPoZQerNtiwtdZ3chDcUAIjZa4P9QoUBgcoTXf-AmDXk3PmHYmMSZBjqi2wm5nErJIZp9brc2fxlGzU-_BszU70ivJtqGEH7Z4fgNnpdy0Q</recordid><startdate>19980801</startdate><enddate>19980801</enddate><creator>Savor, T.</creator><creator>Seviora, R.E.</creator><general>IEEE</general><general>The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE)</general><scope>RIA</scope><scope>RIE</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>7SP</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19980801</creationdate><title>Toward automatic detection of software failures</title><author>Savor, T. ; Seviora, R.E.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c387t-2a44dc220c82ed0779c6aad6d379087a5f8281378423db226da695d21d2425cf3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1998</creationdate><topic>Automatic testing</topic><topic>Costs</topic><topic>Delay</topic><topic>Failure analysis</topic><topic>Law</topic><topic>Legal factors</topic><topic>Product testing</topic><topic>Signal generators</topic><topic>Software</topic><topic>Software systems</topic><topic>Software testing</topic><topic>Specifications</topic><topic>System testing</topic><topic>Telephony</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Savor, T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seviora, R.E.</creatorcontrib><collection>IEEE All-Society Periodicals Package (ASPP) 1998–Present</collection><collection>IEEE Electronic Library (IEL)</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Electronics & Communications Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><jtitle>Computer (Long Beach, Calif.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Savor, T.</au><au>Seviora, R.E.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Toward automatic detection of software failures</atitle><jtitle>Computer (Long Beach, Calif.)</jtitle><stitle>MC</stitle><date>1998-08-01</date><risdate>1998</risdate><volume>31</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>68</spage><epage>74</epage><pages>68-74</pages><issn>0018-9162</issn><eissn>1558-0814</eissn><coden>CPTRB4</coden><abstract>To date, no method has explicitly and cost effectively dealt with failure detection in software systems whose specifications are nondeterministic. In such systems, the specification permits multiple outputs for the same input sequence and system state. Nondeterminism in specifications is advantageous because the specification writer can avoid stating irrelevant behavior as mandatory, freeing the software designer to choose a behavioral alternative that would yield a more desirable implementation. Unfortunately, this flexibility comes at a cost to the failure detection mechanism. It must accommodate all the target system's legal behavioral alternatives and avoid favoring one of them. The article describes a hierarchical supervisor whose failure detection mechanism explicitly addresses systems with nondeterministic specifications. The supervisor, a unit separate from the target system, observes the system's external inputs and outputs and reports any failures. Its hierarchical structure results from splitting the task of identifying the behavioral alternative the target system chooses from the task of checking the details of system behavior. This structure makes it possible to efficiently trade off detection accuracy and computational cost. To evaluate their approach, the authors created a prototype supervisor and used it to supervise the execution of the control program of a small telephone exchange. Results indicate that the hierarchical supervisor can significantly reduce the computational cost of considering the target system's behavioral alternatives. However, although the supervisor's computational cost is significantly reduced, it is still higher than that for the target system.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>IEEE</pub><doi>10.1109/2.707619</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext_linktorsrc |
identifier | ISSN: 0018-9162 |
ispartof | Computer (Long Beach, Calif.), 1998-08, Vol.31 (8), p.68-74 |
issn | 0018-9162 1558-0814 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_ieee_primary_707619 |
source | IEEE Electronic Library (IEL) |
subjects | Automatic testing Costs Delay Failure analysis Law Legal factors Product testing Signal generators Software Software systems Software testing Specifications System testing Telephony |
title | Toward automatic detection of software failures |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-17T13%3A25%3A18IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_RIE&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Toward%20automatic%20detection%20of%20software%20failures&rft.jtitle=Computer%20(Long%20Beach,%20Calif.)&rft.au=Savor,%20T.&rft.date=1998-08-01&rft.volume=31&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=68&rft.epage=74&rft.pages=68-74&rft.issn=0018-9162&rft.eissn=1558-0814&rft.coden=CPTRB4&rft_id=info:doi/10.1109/2.707619&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_RIE%3E26848215%3C/proquest_RIE%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=197431720&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ieee_id=707619&rfr_iscdi=true |