Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Locating and detecting arrays for interaction faults

  • Published:
Journal of Combinatorial Optimization Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The identification of interaction faults in component-based systems has focused on indicating the presence of faults, rather than their location and magnitude. While this is a valuable step in screening a system for interaction faults prior to its release, it provides little information to assist in the correction of such faults. Consequently tests to reveal the location of interaction faults are of interest. The problem of nonadaptive location of interaction faults is formalized under the hypothesis that the system contains (at most) some number d of faults, each involving (at most) some number t of interacting factors. Restrictions on the number and size of the putative faults lead to numerous variants of the basic problem. The relationships between this class of problems and interaction testing using covering arrays to indicate the presence of faults, designed experiments to measure and model faults, and combinatorial group testing to locate faults in a more general testing scenario, are all examined. While each has some definite similarities with the fault location problems for component-based systems, each has some striking differences as well. In this paper, we formulate the combinatorial problems for locating and detecting arrays to undertake interaction fault location. Necessary conditions for existence are established, and using a close connection to covering arrays, asymptotic bounds on the size of minimal locating and detecting arrays are established.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alon N, Goldreich O, Hastad J, Peralta R (1992) Simple constructions of almost k-wise independent random variables. Random Struct Algorithms 3:289–304; addendum in Random Struct Algorithms 4:119–120 (1993)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Azar J, Motwani R, Naor J (1998) Approximating probability distributions using small sample spaces. Combinatorica 18:151–171

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Bierbrauer J, Schellwat H (2000) Almost independent and weakly biased arrays: efficient constructions and cryptologic applications. Lect Notes Comput Sci 1880:533–543

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Bisgaard S (1993) A method for the identification of defining contrasts for 2k−p designs. J Qual Technol 25:28–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Bisgaard S (1996) A comparative analysis of the performance of Taguchi’s linear graphs for the design of two-level fractional factorials. Appl Stat 45:311–322

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Brouwer AE, Cohen AM, Nguyen MVM (2006) Orthogonal arrays of strength 3 and small run sizes. J Stat Plann Infer 136:3268–3280

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Brownlie R, Prowse J, Phadke MS (1992) Robust testing of AT&T PMX/StarMAIL using OATS. AT&T Tech J 71:41–47

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryce RC, Colbourn CJ (2007) The density algorithm for pairwise interaction testing. Softw Test Verif Reliab (to appear)

  • Burr K, Young W (1998) Combinatorial test techniques: table-based automation, test generation, and code coverage. In: Proceedings of the international conference on software testing analysis and review. ACM, New York, pp 503–513

    Google Scholar 

  • Cawse JN (2002) Experimental design for combinatorial and high throughput materials development. GE Glob Res Tech Rep 29(9):769–781

    Google Scholar 

  • Chandra AK, Kou LT, Markowsky G, Zaks S (1983) On sets of boolean n-vectors with all k-projections surjective. Acta Inform 20:103–111

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Chateauneuf MA, Colbourn CJ, Kreher DL (1999) Covering arrays of strength 3. Des Codes Crypt 16:235–242

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen MB (2004) Designing test suites for software interaction testing. PhD thesis, The University of Auckland, Department of Computer Science

  • Cohen DM, Dalal SR, Parelius J, Patton GC (1996a) The combinatorial design approach to automatic test generation. IEEE Softw 13:82–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen G, Litsyn S, Zémor G (1996b) On greedy algorithms in coding theory. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 42:2053–2057

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen MB, Colbourn CJ, Gibbons PB, Mugridge WB (2003) Constructing test suites for interaction testing. In: Proceedings of the international conference on software engineering (ICSE 2003). IEEE, Los Alamitos, pp 38–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen MB, Colbourn CJ, Ling ACH (2007) Constructing strength three covering arrays with augmented annealing. Discret Math (to appear)

  • Colbourn CJ (2004) Combinatorial aspects of covering arrays. Matematiche (Catania) 58:121–167

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Colbourn CJ (2007) Strength two covering arrays: existence tables and projection. Discret Math (to appear)

  • Colbourn CJ, Dinitz JH (2007) The CRC handbook of combinatorial designs, 2nd edn. Chapman and Hall/CRC, Boca Raton

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Colbourn CJ, Martirosyan SS, Mullen GL, Shasha DE, Sherwood GB, Yucas JL (2006a) Products of mixed covering arrays of strength two. J Comb Des 14:124–138

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Colbourn CJ, Martirosyan SS, van Trung T, Walker RA II (2006b) Roux-type constructions for covering arrays of strengths three and four. Des Codes Crypt 41:33–57

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Dalal SR, Karunanithi AJN, Leaton JML, Patton GCP, Horowitz BM (1999) Model-based testing in practice. In: Proceedings of the international conference on software engineering (ICSE ’99), pp 285–294

  • Du D-Z, Hwang FK (2000) Combinatorial group testing and its applications, 2nd edn. World Scientific, River Edge

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Dunietz S, Ehrlich WK, Szablak BD, Mallows CL, Iannino A (1997) Applying design of experiments to software testing. In: Proceedings of the international conference on software engineering (ICSE ’97). IEEE, Los Alamitos, pp 205–215

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • D’yachkov AG, Rykov VV, Rashad AM (1989) Superimposed distance codes. Probl Control Inf Theory 18:237–250

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Erdős P, Frankl P, Füredi Z (1985) Families of finite sets in which no set is covered by the union of r others. Israel J Math 51:79–89

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Gargano L, Körner J, Vaccaro U (1992) Sperner theorems on directed graphs and qualitative independence. J Comb Theory A 61:173–192

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Gargano L, Körner J, Vaccaro U (1993) Sperner capacities. Graphs Comb 9:31–46

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Gargano L, Körner J, Vaccaro U (1994) Capacities: from information to extremal set theory. J Comb Theory A 68:296–316

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Ghosh S, Burns C (2001) Two general classes of search designs for factor screening experiments with factors at three levels. Metrika 54:1–17

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Ghosh S, Burns C (2002) Comparison of four new general classes of search designs. Austral New Zealand J Stat 44:357–366

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Godbole AP, Skipper DE, Sunley RA (1996) t-covering arrays: upper bounds and Poisson approximations. Comb Probab Comput 5:105–118

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Hartman A (2005) Software and hardware testing using combinatorial covering suites. In: Golumbic MC, Hartman IB-A (eds) Interdisciplinary applications of graph theory, combinatorics, and algorithms. Springer, Norwell, pp 237–266

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hartman A, Raskin L (2004) Problems and algorithms for covering arrays. Discret Math 284:149–156

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Hedayat AS, Sloane NJA, Stufken J (1999) Orthogonal arrays. Springer, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Hnich B, Prestwich S, Selensky E (2005) Constraint-based approaches to the covering test problem. Lect Notes Comput Sci 3419:172–186

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoskins DS, Colbourn CJ, Montgomery DC (2005) Software performance testing using covering arrays. In: Fifth international workshop on software and performance (WOSP 2005), pp 131–137

  • Hoskins DS, Colbourn CJ, Kulahci M (2007) Sub-D-optimal designs for screening experiments. Am J Math Manag Sci (to appear)

  • Katona G (1973) Two applications (for search theory and truth functions) of Sperner type theorems. Periodica Math 3:19–26

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Katona G, Srivastava JN (1983) Minimal 2-coverings of a finite affine space based on GF(2). J Stat Plann Infer 8:375–388

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Kautz WH, Singleton RR (1964) Nonrandom binary superimposed codes. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 10:363–377

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kleitman D, Spencer J (1973) Families of k-independent sets. Discret Math 6:255–262

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Körner J, Lucertini M (1994) Compressing inconsistent data. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 40:706–715

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn DR, Reilly M (2002) An investigation of the applicability of design of experiments to software testing. In: Proceedings of the 27th annual NASA Goddard/IEEE software engineering workshop. IEEE, Los Alamitos, pp 91–95

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn DR, Wallace DR, Gallo AM (2004) Software fault interactions and implications for software testing. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 30(6):418–421

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kurosawa K, Johansson T, Stinson DR (1997) Almost k-wise independent sample spaces and their cryptologic applications. Lect Notes Comput Sci 1233:409–421

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Macula AJ, Torney DC, Vilenkin PA (2000) Two-stage group testing for complexes in the presence of errors. In: Discrete mathematical problems with medical applications, New Brunswick, NJ, 1999. Amer Math Soc, Providence, pp 145–157

    Google Scholar 

  • Macula AJ, Rykov VV, Yekhanin S (2004) Trivial two-stage group testing for complexes using almost disjunct matrices. Discret Appl Math 137(1):97–107

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Mandl R (1985) Orthogonal latin squares: an application of experiment design to compiler testing. Commun ACM 28(10):1054–1058

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marczewski E (1948) Independence d’ensembles et prolongement de mesures. Colloq Math 1:122–132

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Martirosyan SS, Colbourn CJ (2005) Recursive constructions for covering arrays. Bayreuther Math Schr 74:266–275

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Martirosyan SS, van Trung T (2004) On t-covering arrays. Des Codes Cryptogr 32:323–339

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery DC (2005) Design and analysis of experiments, 6th edn. Wiley, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Naor J, Naor M (1993) Small-bias probability spaces: efficient constructions and applications. SIAM J Comput 22:838–856

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Nurmela K (2004) Upper bounds for covering arrays by tabu search. Discret Appl Math 138:143–152

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Phadke MS (1997) Planning efficient software tests. J Def Softw Eng 10:11–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Poljak S, Tuza Z (1989) On the maximum number of qualitatively independent partitions. J Comb Theory A 51:111–116

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Poljak S, Pultr A, Rödl V (1983) On qualitatively independent partitions and related problems. Discret Appl Math 6:193–205

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Réyni A (1971) Foundations of probability. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Roux G (1987) k-propriétés dans les tableaux de n colonnes: cas particulier de la k-surjectivité et de la k-permutivité. PhD thesis, Université de Paris

  • Ruszinkó M (1994) On the upper bound of the size of the r-cover-free families. J Comb Theory Ser A 66:302–310

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Scheffe H (1953) A method for judging all contrasts in the analysis of variance. Biometrika, pp 87–104

  • Seroussi G, Bshouty NH (1988) Vector sets for exhaustive testing of logic circuits. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 34:513–522

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Shasha DE, Kouranov AY, Lejay LV, Chou MF, Coruzzi GM (2001) Using combinatorial design to study regulation by multiple input signals: a tool for parsimony in the post-genomics era. Plant Physiol 127:1590–1594

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shirakura T, Takahashi T, Srivastava JN (1996) Searching probabilities for nonzero effects in search designs for the noisy case. Ann Stat 24:2560–2568

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Sloane NJA (1993) Covering arrays and intersecting codes. J Comb Des 1:51–63

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Sobel M, Groll PA (1959) Group testing to eliminate efficiently all defectives in a binomial sample. Bell Syst Tech J 38:1179–1252

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Srivastava JN (1975) Designs for searching non-negligible effects. In: Srivastava JN (ed) A survey of statistical design and linear models. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 507–519

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevens B (1998) Transversal covers and packings. PhD thesis, Mathematics, University of Toronto

  • Taguchi G, Wu Y (1985) Introduction to off-line quality control. Central Japan Quality Control Association

  • Tai KC, Yu L (2002) A test generation strategy for pairwise testing. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 28:109–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tang DT, Chen CL (1984) Iterative exhaustive pattern generation for logic testing. IBM J Res Dev 28:212–219

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Torney DC (1999) Sets pooling designs. Ann Comb 3(1):95–101

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Tung YW, Aldiwan WS (2000) Automating test case generation for the new generation mission software system. In: Proceedings of the 30th IEEE aerospace conference. IEEE, Los Alamitos, pp 431–437

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker RA II, Colbourn CJ (2007a) Perfect hash families: constructions and existence. J Math Crypt 1:125–150

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Walker RA II, Colbourn CJ (2007b) Tabu search for covering arrays using permutation vectors. J Stat Plann Infer (to appear)

  • Williams AW, Probert RL (2001) A measure for component interaction test coverage. In: Proceedings of the ACS/IEEE international conference on computer systems and applications. IEEE, Los Alamitos, pp 301–311

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Computer Science and Engineering, Arizona State University, PO Box 878809, Tempe, AZ, 85287-8809, USA

    Charles J. Colbourn & Daniel W. McClary

Authors
  1. Charles J. Colbourn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Daniel W. McClary
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Charles J. Colbourn.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Colbourn, C.J., McClary, D.W. Locating and detecting arrays for interaction faults. J Comb Optim 15, 17–48 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10878-007-9082-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10878-007-9082-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation