Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Generating Combinatorial Test Cases by Efficient SAT Encodings Suitable for CDCL SAT Solvers

  • Conference paper
Logic for Programming, Artificial Intelligence, and Reasoning (LPAR 2010)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 6397))

Abstract

Generating test cases for combinatorial testing is to find a covering array in Combinatorial Designs. In this paper, we consider the problem of finding optimal covering arrays by SAT encoding. We present two encodings suitable for modern CDCL SAT solvers. One is based on the order encoding that is efficient in the sense that unit propagation achieves the bounds consistency in CSPs. Another one is based on a combination of the order encoding and Hnich’s encoding. CDCL SAT solvers have an important role in the latest SAT technology. The effective use of them is essential for enhancing efficiency. In our experiments, we found solutions that can be competitive with the previously known results for the arrays of strength two to six with small to moderate size of components and symbols. Moreover, we succeeded either in proving the optimality of known bounds or in improving known lower bounds for some arrays.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. de Kleer, J.: A comparison of ATMS and CSP techniques. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 1989), pp. 290–296 (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Walsh, T.: SAT v CSP. In: Dechter, R. (ed.) CP 2000. LNCS, vol. 1894, pp. 441–456. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Kasif, S.: On the parallel complexity of discrete relaxation in constraint satisfaction networks. Artificial Intelligence 45(3), 275–286 (1990)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Gent, I.P.: Arc consistency in SAT. In: Proceedings of the 15th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI 2002), pp. 121–125 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Selman, B., Levesque, H.J., Mitchell, D.G.: A new method for solving hard satisfiability problems. In: Proceedings of the 10th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 1992), pp. 440–446 (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Iwama, K., Miyazaki, S.: SAT-variable complexity of hard combinatorial problems. In: Proceedings of the IFIP 13th World Computer Congress, pp. 253–258 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gelder, A.V.: Another look at graph coloring via propositional satisfiability. Discrete Applied Mathematics 156(2), 230–243 (2008)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Tamura, N., Taga, A., Kitagawa, S., Banbara, M.: Compiling finite linear CSP into SAT. In: Benhamou, F. (ed.) CP 2006. LNCS, vol. 4204, pp. 590–603. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Tamura, N., Taga, A., Kitagawa, S., Banbara, M.: Compiling finite linear CSP into SAT. Constraints 14(2), 254–272 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Gavanelli, M.: The log-support encoding of CSP into SAT. In: Bessière, C. (ed.) CP 2007. LNCS, vol. 4741, pp. 815–822. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Williams, A.W.: Determination of test configurations for pair-wise interaction coverage. In: Proceedings of 13th International Conference on Testing Communicating Systems (TestCom 2000), pp. 59–74 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Chateauneuf, M.A., Kreher, D.L.: On the state of strength-three covering arrays. Journal of Combinatorial Designs 10(4), 217–238 (2002)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Hartman, A., Raskin, L.: Problems and algorithms for covering arrays. Discrete Mathematics 284(1-3), 149–156 (2004)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Cohen, D.M., Dalal, S.R., Fredman, M.L., Patton, G.C.: The AETG system: An approach to testing based on combinatiorial design. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 23(7), 437–444 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Lei, Y., Tai, K.C.: In-parameter-order: A test generation strategy for pairwise testing. In: Proceedings of 3rd IEEE International Symposium on High-Assurance Systems Engineering (HASE 1998), pp. 254–261 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Nurmela, K.J.: Upper bounds for covering arrays by tabu search. Discrete Applied Mathematics 138(1-2), 143–152 (2004)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Cohen, M.B., Gibbons, P.B., Mugridge, W.B., Colbourn, C.J.: Constructing test suites for interaction testing. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 2003), pp. 38–48 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Shiba, T., Tsuchiya, T., Kikuno, T.: Using artificial life techniques to generate test cases for combinatorial testing. In: Proceedings of 28th International Computer Software and Applications Conference (COMPSAC 2004), pp. 72–77 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Bulutoglu, D., Margot, F.: Classification of orthogonal arrays by integer programming. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 138, 654–666 (2008)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Hnich, B., Prestwich, S.D., Selensky, E.: Constraint-based approaches to the covering test problem. In: Faltings, B.V., Petcu, A., Fages, F., Rossi, F. (eds.) CSCLP 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3419, pp. 172–186. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Hnich, B., Prestwich, S.D., Selensky, E., Smith, B.M.: Constraint models for the covering test problem. Constraints 11(2-3), 199–219 (2006)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Lopez-Escogido, D., Torres-Jimenez, J., Rodriguez-Tello, E., Rangel-Valdez, N.: Strength two covering arrays construction using a sat representation. In: Gelbukh, A., Morales, E.F. (eds.) MICAI 2008. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5317, pp. 44–53. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  23. Cohen, M.B., Dwyer, M.B., Shi, J.: Constructing interaction test suites for highly-configurable systems in the presence of constraints: A greedy approach. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 34(5), 633–650 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Drescher, C., Walsh, T.: A translational approach to constraint answer set solving. TPLP 10(4-6), 465–480 (2010)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. Zhang, H.: Combinatorial designs by sat solvers. In: Handbook of Satisfiability, pp. 533–568. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Colbourn, C.J.: Strength two covering arrays: Existence tables and projection. Discrete Mathematics 308(5-6), 772–786 (2008)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Sloane, N.J.A.: Covering arrays and intersecting codes. Journal of Combinatorial Designs 1, 51–63 (1993)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Seroussi, G., Bshouty, N.H.: Vector sets for exhaustive testing of logic circuits. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 34(3), 513–522 (1988)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Colbourn, C.J.: Covering array tables (2010), http://www.public.asu.edu/~ccolbou/src/tabby/catable.html (Last Accessed on April 26, 2010)

  30. Régin, J.C.: Generalized arc consistency for global cardinality constraint. In: Proceedings of the 13th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 1996), vol. 1, pp. 209–215 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Flener, P., Frisch, A.M., Hnich, B., Kiziltan, Z., Miguel, I., Pearson, J., Walsh, T.: Breaking row and column symmetries in matrix models. In: Van Hentenryck, P. (ed.) CP 2002. LNCS, vol. 2470, pp. 462–476. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  32. Grayland, A., Miguel, I., Roney-Dougal, C.M.: Snake lex: An alternative to double lex. In: Gent, I.P. (ed.) CP 2009. LNCS, vol. 5732, pp. 391–399. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  33. Yan, J., Zhang, J.: A backtracking search tool for constructing combinatorial test suites. Journal of Systems and Software 81(10), 1681–1693 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Eén, N., Sörensson, N.: An extensible SAT-solver. In: Giunchiglia, E., Tacchella, A. (eds.) SAT 2003. LNCS, vol. 2919, pp. 502–518. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Information Science and Technology Center, Kobe University, Japan

    Mutsunori Banbara & Naoyuki Tamura

  2. Graduate School of System Informatics, Kobe University, Japan

    Haruki Matsunaka

  3. National Institute of Informatics, Japan

    Katsumi Inoue

Authors
  1. Mutsunori Banbara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Haruki Matsunaka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Naoyuki Tamura
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Katsumi Inoue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institut für Computersprachen 185.2, Theory and Logic Group, TU Wien, Favoritenstraße 9-11, A-1040, Vienna, Austria

    Christian G. Fermüller

  2. School of Computer Science, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Kilburn Building, M13 9PL, Manchester, United Kingdom

    Andrei Voronkov

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Banbara, M., Matsunaka, H., Tamura, N., Inoue, K. (2010). Generating Combinatorial Test Cases by Efficient SAT Encodings Suitable for CDCL SAT Solvers . In: Fermüller, C.G., Voronkov, A. (eds) Logic for Programming, Artificial Intelligence, and Reasoning. LPAR 2010. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6397. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16242-8_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16242-8_9

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-16241-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-16242-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation