On interleaving space exploration of multi-threaded programs

doi:10.1007/s11704-020-9501-6

Front. Comput. Sci.

2021, Vol. 15

Issue (4) : 154206 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11704-020-9501-6

RESEARCH ARTICLE

On interleaving space exploration of multi-threaded programs

Dongjie CHEN^1,², Yanyan JIANG^1,²(

), Chang XU^1,²(

), Xiaoxing MA^1,²

¹. State Key Laboratory for Novel Software Technology, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210023, China
². Department of Computer Science and Technology, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210023, China

Download: PDF(455 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks

Abstract

Exploring the interleaving space of a multithreaded program to efficiently detect concurrency bugs is important but also difficult because of the astronomically many thread schedules. This paper presents a novel framework to decompose a thread schedule generator that explores the interleaving space into the composition of a basic generator and its extension under the “small interleaving hypothesis”. Under this framework, we in-depth analyzed research work on interleaving space exploration, illustrated how to design an effective schedule generator, and shed light on future research opportunities.

Keywords survey testing concurrency bugs interleaving space

Corresponding Author(s): Yanyan JIANG,Chang XU

Just Accepted Date: 27 April 2020 Issue Date: 11 March 2021

Cite this article:

Dongjie CHEN,Yanyan JIANG,Chang XU, et al. On interleaving space exploration of multi-threaded programs[J]. Front. Comput. Sci., 2021, 15(4): 154206.

URL:

https://academic.hep.com.cn/fcs/EN/10.1007/s11704-020-9501-6
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fcs/EN/Y2021/V15/I4/154206

1	J W Voung, R Jhala, S Lerner. RELAY: static race detection on millions of lines of code. In: Proceedings of Joint Meeting of the European Software Engineering Conference and the ACMSIGSOFT Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering. 2007, 205–214 https://doi.org/10.1145/1287624.1287654
2	M Naik, A Aiken, J Whaley. Effective static race detection for java. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation. 2006, 308–319 https://doi.org/10.1145/1133255.1134018
3	S Blackshear, N Gorogiannis, P W O’Hearn, I Sergey. RacerD: compositional static race detection. In: Proceedings of ACM International Conference on Object Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications. 2018, 1–28 https://doi.org/10.1145/3276514
4	N Gorogiannis, P W O’Hearn, I Sergey. A true positives theorem for a static race detector. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages. 2019, 1–29 https://doi.org/10.1145/3290370
5	S Savage, M Burrows, G Nelson, P Sobalvarro, T Anderson. Eraser: a dynamic data race detector for multithreaded programs. ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, 1997, 15(4): 391–411 https://doi.org/10.1145/265924.265927
6	R Netzer. Race Condition Detection for Debugging Shared-memory Parallel Programs. University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1991
7	Y Smaragdakis, J Evans, C Sadowski, J Yi, C Flanagan. Sound predictive race detection in polynomial time. In: Proceedings of Annual ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages. 2012, 387–400 https://doi.org/10.1145/2103621.2103702
8	R O’Callahan, J D Choi. Hybrid dynamic data race detection. ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 2003, 38(10): 167–178 https://doi.org/10.1145/966049.781528
9	T Sheng, N Vachharajani, S Eranian, R Hundt, W Chen, W Zheng. RACEZ: a lightweight and non-invasive race detection tool for production applications. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Software Engineering. 2011, 401–410
10	C Flanagan, S N Freund. FastTrack: efficient and precise dynamic race detection. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation. 2009, 121–133 https://doi.org/10.1145/1543135.1542490
11	D Marino, M Musuvathi, S Narayanasamy. LiteRace: effective sampling for lightweight data-race detection. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation. 2009, 134–143 https://doi.org/10.1145/1543135.1542491
12	MD Bond, K E Coons, K S McKinley. PACER: proportional detection of data races. ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 2010, 45(6): 255–268 https://doi.org/10.1145/1809028.1806626
13	M Prvulovic, J Torrellas. ReEnact: using thread-level speculation mechanisms to debug data races in multithreaded codes. In: Proceedings of Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture. 2003, 110–121 https://doi.org/10.1145/871656.859632
14	A K Rajagopalan, J Huang. RDIT: race detection from incomplete traces. In: Proceedings of Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering. 2015, 914–917 https://doi.org/10.1145/2786805.2803209
15	Y Cai, L Cao. Effective and precise dynamic detection of hidden races for java programs. In: Proceedings of Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering. 2015, 450–461 https://doi.org/10.1145/2786805.2786839
16	B Petrov, M Vechev, M Sridharan, J Dolby. Race detection for web applications. In: Proceedings of ACMSIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation. 2012, 251–262 https://doi.org/10.1145/2345156.2254095
17	V Raychev, M Vechev, M Sridharan. Effective race detection for eventdriven programs. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Object Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications. 2013, 151–166 https://doi.org/10.1145/2544173.2509538
18	P Maiya, A Kanade, R Majumdar. Race detection for android applications. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation. 2014, 316–325 https://doi.org/10.1145/2666356.2594311
19	Y Yu, T Rodeheffer, W Chen. RaceTrack: efficient detection of data race conditions via adaptive tracking. In: Proceedings of ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles. 2005, 221–234 https://doi.org/10.1145/1095809.1095832
20	B Kasikci, C Zamfir, G Candea. RaceMob: crowdsourced data race detection. In: Proceedings of ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles. 2013, 406–422 https://doi.org/10.1145/2517349.2522736
21	J D Choi, K Lee, A Loginov, R O’Callahan, V Sarkar, V Sarkar, M Sridharan. Efficient and precise datarace detection for multithreaded object oriented programs. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation. 2002, 258–269 https://doi.org/10.1145/543552.512560
22	S Narayanasamy, Z Wang, J Tigani, A Edwards, B Calder. Automatically classifying benign and harmful data races using replay analysis. ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 2007, 42(6): 22–31 https://doi.org/10.1145/1273442.1250738
23	B Kasikci, C Zamfir, G Candea. Data races vs. data race bugs: telling the difference with portend. ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 2012, 47(4): 185–198 https://doi.org/10.1145/2248487.2150997
24	S Lu, J Tucek, F Qin, Y Zhou. AVIO: detecting atomicity violations via access interleaving invariants. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems. 2006, 37–48 https://doi.org/10.1145/1168917.1168864
25	C Flanagan, S N Freund, J Yi. Velodrome: a sound and complete dynamic atomicity checker for multithreaded programs. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation. 2008, 293–303 https://doi.org/10.1145/1379022.1375618
26	C S Park, K Sen. Randomized active atomicity violation detection in concurrent programs. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering. 2008, 135–145 https://doi.org/10.1145/1453101.1453121
27	S Park, S Lu, Y Zhou. CTrigger: exposing atomicity violation bugs from their hiding places. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems. 2009, 25–36 https://doi.org/10.1145/1508284.1508249
28	S Park, R W Vuduc, M J Harrold. Falcon: fault localization in concurrent programs. In: Proceedings of ACM/IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering. 2010, 245–254 https://doi.org/10.1145/1806799.1806838
29	S Biswas, J Huang, A Sengupta, M D Bond. DoubleChecker: efficient sound and precise atomicity checking. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation. 2014, 28–39 https://doi.org/10.1145/2666356.2594323
30	C Flanagan, S N Freund. Atomizer: a dynamic atomicity checker for multithreaded programs. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages. 2004, 256–267 https://doi.org/10.1145/982962.964023
31	S Lu, S Park, C Hu, X Ma, W Jiang, Z Li, R A Popa, Y Zhou. MUVI: automatically inferring multi-variable access correlations and detecting related semantic and concurrency bugs. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGOPS Symposium on Operating Systems Principles. 2007, 103–116 https://doi.org/10.1145/1323293.1294272
32	K Havelund. Using runtime analysis to guide model checking of java programs. In: Proceedings of International SPINWorkshop onModel Checking of Software. 2000, 245–264 https://doi.org/10.1007/10722468_15
33	Y Cai, S Wu, W K Chan. ConLock: a constraint-based approach to dynamic checking on deadlocks in multithreaded programs. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Software Engineering. 2014, 491–502 https://doi.org/10.1145/2568225.2568312
34	M Eslamimehr, J Palsberg. Sherlock: scalable deadlock detection for concurrent programs. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering. 2014, 353–365 https://doi.org/10.1145/2635868.2635918
35	K Sen. Effective random testing of concurrent programs. In: Proceedings of IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering. 2007, 323–332 https://doi.org/10.1145/1321631.1321679
36	F A Bianchi, A Margara, M Pezzè. A survey of recent trends in testing concurrent software systems. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 2018, 44(8): 747–783 https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2017.2707089
37	P Thomson, A F Donaldson, A Betts. Concurrency testing using schedule bounding: an empirical study. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles and Practice of Parallel Programming. 2014, 15–28 https://doi.org/10.1145/2692916.2555260
38	A Desai, S Qadeer, S A Seshia. Systematic testing of asynchronous reactive systems. In: Proceedings of Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering. 2015, 73–83 https://doi.org/10.1145/2786805.2786861
39	H Fu, Z Wang, X Chen, X Fan. A systematic survey on automated concurrency bug detection, exposing, avoidance, and fixing techniques. Software Quality Journal, 2018, 26(3): 855–889 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11219-017-9385-3
40	V Arora, R Bhatia, M Singh. A systematic review of approaches for testing concurrent programs. Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience, 2016, 28(5): 1572–1611 https://doi.org/10.1002/cpe.3711
41	S R S Souza, M A S Brito, R A Silva, P S L Souza, E Zaluska. Research in concurrent software testing: a systematic review. In: Proceedings of Workshop on Parallel and Distributed Systems: Testing, Analysis, and Debugging. 2011, 1–5 https://doi.org/10.1145/2002962.2002964
42	P Sewell, S Sarkar, S Owens, F Z Nardelli, M O Myreen. X86-TSO: a rigorous and usable programmer’s model for x86 multiprocessors. Communications of the ACM, 2010, 53(7): 89–97 https://doi.org/10.1145/1785414.1785443
43	J Manson, W Pugh, S V Adve. The java memory model. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages. 2005, 378–391 https://doi.org/10.1145/1047659.1040336
44	P Godefroid. Model checking for programming languages using veriSoft. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages. 1997, 174–186 https://doi.org/10.1145/263699.263717
45	M Musuvathi, S Qadeer. Iterative context bounding for systematic testing of multithreaded programs. ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 2007, 42(6): 446–455 https://doi.org/10.1145/1273442.1250785
46	M Emmi, S Qadeer, Z Rakamarić. Delay-bounded scheduling. ACMSIGPLAN Notices, 2011, 46(1): 411–422 https://doi.org/10.1145/1925844.1926432
47	S Burckhardt, P Kothari, M Musuvathi, S Nagarakatte. A randomized scheduler with probabilistic guarantees of finding bugs. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems. 2010, 167–178 https://doi.org/10.1145/1735970.1736040
48	P Godefroid, K Sen. Combining Model Checking and Testing. In: Handbook of Model Checking. Springer, Cham, 2018, 613–649 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10575-8_19
49	A Andoni, D Daniliuc, S Khurshid. Evaluating the “Small Scope Hypothesis”. 2003
50	S Lu, S Park, E Seo, Y Zhou. Learning from mistakes: a comprehensive study on real world concurrency bug characteristics. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems. 2008, 329–339 https://doi.org/10.1145/1353535.1346323
51	S Qadeer, J Rehof. Context-bounded model checking of concurrent software. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems. 2005, 93–107 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-31980-1_7
52	S Nagarakatte, S Burckhardt, M M Martin, M Musuvathi. Multicore acceleration of priority-based schedulers for concurrency bug detection. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation. 2012, 543–554 https://doi.org/10.1145/2345156.2254128
53	A Nistor, Q Luo, M Pradel, T R Gross, D Marinov. BALLERINA: automatic generation and clustering of efficient random unit tests for multithreaded code. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Software Engineering. 2012, 727–737 https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSE.2012.6227145
54	G Li, S Lu, M Musuvathi, S Nath, R Padhye. Efficient scalable threadsafety- violation detection: finding thousands of concurrency bugs during testing. In: Proceedings of ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles. 2019, 162–180 https://doi.org/10.1145/3341301.3359638
55	K Sen. Race directed random testing of concurrent programs. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation. 2008, 11–21 https://doi.org/10.1145/1379022.1375584
56	P Joshi, C S Park, K Sen, M Naik. A randomized dynamic program analysis technique for detecting real deadlocks. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation. 2009, 110–120 https://doi.org/10.1145/1543135.1542489
57	X Yuan, J Yang, R Gu. Partial order aware concurrency sampling. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Computer Aided Verification. 2018, 317–335 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96142-2_20
58	R H Arpaci-Dusseau, A C Arpaci-Dusseau. Operating Systems: Three Easy Pieces. Arpaci-Dusseau Books, LLC, 2018
59	R I Davis, L Cucu-Grosjean, M Bertogna, A Burns. A review of priority assignment in real-time systems. Journal of Systems Architecture, 2016, 65: 64–82 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sysarc.2016.04.002
60	D Chen, Y Jiang, C Xu, X Ma, J Lu. Testing multithreaded programs via thread speed control. In: Proceedings of ACM JointMeeting on European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering. 2018, 15–25 https://doi.org/10.1145/3236024.3236077
61	M Musuvathi, S Qadeer, T Ball, G Basler, P A Nainar, I Neamtiu. Finding and reproducing heisenbugs in concurrent programs. In: Proceedings of USENIX Conference on Operating Systems Design and Implementation. 2008, 267–280
62	P Godefroid. Partial-order Methods for the Verification of Concurrent Systems: An Approach to the State-Explosion Problem. Heidelberg: Springer, 1996 https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-60761-7
63	C Flanagan, P Godefroid. Dynamic partial-order reduction for model checking software. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages. 2005, 110–121 https://doi.org/10.1145/1047659.1040315
64	Y Yang, X Chen, G Gopalakrishnan. Inspect: a runtime model checker for multithreaded C programs. Technical Report, 2008
65	M Kokologiannakis, A Raad, V Vafeiadis. Effective lock handling in stateless model checking. Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages. 2019, 3(OOPSLA): 1–26 https://doi.org/10.1145/3360599
66	S Lu, W Jiang, Y Zhou. A study of interleaving coverage criteria. In: Proceedings of JointMeeting on European Software Engineering Conference and the ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering: Companion Papers. 2007, 533–536 https://doi.org/10.1145/1295014.1295034
67	A Bron, E Farchi, Y Magid, Y Nir, S Ur. Applications of synchronization coverage. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles and Practice of Parallel Programming. 2005, 206–212 https://doi.org/10.1145/1065944.1065972
68	S Hong, J Ahn, S Park, M Kim, M J Harrold. Testing concurrent programs to achieve high synchronization coverage. In: Proceedings of International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis. 2012, 210–220 https://doi.org/10.1145/2338965.2336779
69	J Yu, S Narayanasamy. A case for an interleaving constrained sharedmemory multi-processor. In: Proceedings of Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture. 2009, 325–336 https://doi.org/10.1145/1555815.1555796
70	C Wang, M Said, A Gupta. Coverage guided systematic concurrency testing. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Software Engineering. 2011, 221–230 https://doi.org/10.1145/1985793.1985824
71	J Burnim, T Elmas, G Necula, K Sen. CONCURRIT: testing concurrent programs with programmable state-space exploration. In: Proceedings of the 4th USENIX Workshop on Hot Topics in Parallelism. 2012
72	J Huang, P O Meredith, G Rosu. Maximal sound predictive race detection with control flow abstraction. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation. 2014, 337–348 https://doi.org/10.1145/2666356.2594315
73	S Huang, J Huang. Maximal causality reduction for TSO and PSO. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Object- Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications. 2016, 447–461 https://doi.org/10.1145/3022671.2984025
74	J Huang, Q Luo, G Rosu. GPredict: generic predictive concurrency analysis. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Software Engineering. 2015, 847–857 https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSE.2015.96
75	M Eslamimehr, J Palsberg. Race directed scheduling of concurrent programs. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles and Practice of Parallel Programming. 2014, 301–314 https://doi.org/10.1145/2692916.2555263
76	P Godefroid, N Klarlund, K Sen. DART: directed automated random testing. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation. 2005, 213–223 https://doi.org/10.1145/1064978.1065036
77	K Sen. Concolic testing. In: Proceedings of IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering. 2007, 571–572 https://doi.org/10.1145/1321631.1321746
78	F Sorrentino, A Farzan, P Madhusudan. PENELOPE: weaving threads to expose atomicity violations. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering. 2010, 37–46 https://doi.org/10.1145/1882291.1882300
79	G Lu, L Xu, Y Yang, B Xu. Predictive analysis for race detection in software-defined networ. Sciece China Information Sciences, 2019, 62(6): 62101 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11432-018-9826-x
80	L De Moura, N Bjørner. Z3: an efficient SMT solver. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems. 2008, 337–340 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-78800-3_24
81	P Joshi, M Naik, K Sen, D Gay. An effective dynamic analysis for detecting generalized deadlocks. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering. 2010, 327–336 https://doi.org/10.1145/1882291.1882339
82	M Musuvathi, S Qadeer. Fair stateless model checking. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation. 2008, 362–371 https://doi.org/10.1145/1379022.1375625
83	M Batty, S Owens, S Sarkar, P Sewell, T Weber. Mathematizing C++ concurrency. In: Proceedings of Annual ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages. 2011, 55–66 https://doi.org/10.1145/1925844.1926394
84	B Norris, B Demsky. CDSchecker: checking concurrent data structures written with C/C++ atomics. ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 2013, 48(10): 131–150 https://doi.org/10.1145/2544173.2509514
85	B Kasikci, W Cui, X Ge, B Niu. Lazy diagnosis of in-production concurrency bugs. In: Proceedings of the 26th Symposium on Operating Systems Principles. 2017, 582–598 https://doi.org/10.1145/3132747.3132767
86	S Guo, M Kusano, C Wang, Z Yang, A Gupta. Assertion guided symbolic execution of multithreaded programs. In: Proceedings of Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering. 2015, 854–865 https://doi.org/10.1145/2786805.2786841
87	T Bergan, D Grossman, L Ceze. Symbolic execution of multithreaded programs from arbitrary program contexts. In: Proceedings of ACM International Conference on Object Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications. 2014, 491–506 https://doi.org/10.1145/2714064.2660200
88	S Guo, M Kusano, C Wang. Conc-ISE: incremental symbolic execution of concurrent software. In: Proceedings of IEEE/ACMInternational Conference on Automated Software Engineering. 2016, 531–542 https://doi.org/10.1145/2970276.2970332
89	A Farzan, A Holzer, N Razavi, H Veith. Con2colic testing. In: Proceedings of Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering. 2013, 37–47 https://doi.org/10.1145/2491411.2491453

[1]

Article highlights

Download

[1]	Xiaobing SUN, Tianchi ZHOU, Rongcun WANG, Yucong DUAN, Lili BO, Jianming CHANG. Experience report: investigating bug fixes in machine learning frameworks/libraries[J]. Front. Comput. Sci., 2021, 15(6): 156212-.
[2]	Shahbaz ALI, Hailong SUN, Yongwang ZHAO. Model learning: a survey of foundations, tools and applications[J]. Front. Comput. Sci., 2021, 15(5): 155210-.
[3]	Huiyan XU, Zhongqing WANG, Yifei ZHANG, Xiaolan WENG, Zhijian WANG, Guodong ZHOU. Document structure model for survey generation using neural network[J]. Front. Comput. Sci., 2021, 15(4): 154325-.
[4]	Miao CAI, Hao HUANG. A survey of operating system support for persistent memory[J]. Front. Comput. Sci., 2021, 15(4): 154207-.
[5]	Panthadeep BHATTACHARJEE, Pinaki MITRA. A survey of density based clustering algorithms[J]. Front. Comput. Sci., 2021, 15(1): 151308-.
[6]	Syed Farooq ALI, Muhammad Aamir KHAN, Ahmed Sohail ASLAM. Fingerprint matching, spoof and liveness detection: classification and literature review[J]. Front. Comput. Sci., 2021, 15(1): 151310-.
[7]	Xin CHEN, He JIANG, Zhenyu CHEN, Tieke HE, Liming NIE. Automatic test report augmentation to assist crowdsourced testing[J]. Front. Comput. Sci., 2019, 13(5): 943-959.
[8]	Yongwang ZHAO, Zhibin YANG, Dianfu MA. A survey on formal specification and verification of separation kernels[J]. Front. Comput. Sci., 2017, 11(4): 585-607.
[9]	Xiaofang QI,Jun HE,Peng WANG,Huayang ZHOU. Variable strength combinatorial testing of concurrent programs[J]. Front. Comput. Sci., 2016, 10(4): 631-643.
[10]	Priyanka CHAWLA,Inderveer CHANA,Ajay RANA. A novel strategy for automatic test data generation using soft computing technique[J]. Front. Comput. Sci., 2015, 9(3): 346-363.
[11]	Yan ZHANG,Dunwei GONG. Generating test data for both paths coverage and faults detection using genetic algorithms: multi-path case[J]. Front. Comput. Sci., 2014, 8(5): 726-740.
[12]	Chang-ai SUN,Zuoyi WANG,Guan WANG. A property-based testing framework for encryption programs[J]. Front. Comput. Sci., 2014, 8(3): 478-489.
[13]	Dunwei GONG, Yan ZHANG. Generating test data for both path coverage and fault detection using genetic algorithms[J]. Front Comput Sci, 2013, 7(6): 822-837.
[14]	David Lorge PARNAS. The use of mathematics in software quality assurance[J]. Front Comput Sci, 2012, 6(1): 3-16.
[15]	An LU, Wenbin FANG, Shing-Chi CHEUNG, Chang XU, Yu LIU, . Data-driven testing methodology for RFID systems[J]. Front. Comput. Sci., 2010, 4(3): 354-364.

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed