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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Computer (Long Beach, Calif.) Calif.), 1998-08, Vol.31 (8), p.68-74
Hauptverfasser: Savor, T., Seviora, R.E.
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 &amp; 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