skip to main content
10.1145/1181775.1181782acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesfseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Failure proximity: a fault localization-based approach

Authors Info & Claims
Published:05 November 2006Publication History

ABSTRACT

Recent software systems usually feature an automated failure reporting system, with which a huge number of failing traces are collected every day. In order to prioritize fault diagnosis, failing traces due to the same fault are expected to be grouped together. Previous methods, by hypothesizing that similar failing traces imply the same fault, cluster failing traces based on the literal trace similarity, which we call trace proximity. However, since a fault can be triggered in many ways, failing traces due to the same fault can be quite different. Therefore, previous methods actually group together traces exhibiting similar behaviors, like similar branch coverage, rather than traces due to the same fault. In this paper, we propose a new type of failure proximity, called R-Proximity, which regards two failing traces as similar if they suggest roughly the same fault location. The fault location each failing case suggests is automatically obtained with Sober, an existing statistical debugging tool. We show that with R-Proximity, failing traces due to the same fault can be grouped together. In addition, we find that R-Proximity is helpful for statistical debugging: It can help developers interpret and utilize the statistical debugging result. We illustrate the usage of R-Proximity with a case study on the grep program and some experiments on the Siemens suite, and the result clearly demonstrates the advantage of R-Proximity over trace proximity.

References

  1. I. Borg and P. Groenen. Modern Multidimensional Scaling: Theory and Applications. Springer, first edition, 1996.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. J. F. Bowring, J. M. Rehg, and M. J. Harrold. Active learning for automatic classification of software behavior. In ISSTA'04. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. H. Cleve and A. Zeller. Locating causes of program failures. In ICSE'05. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. W. Dickinson, D. Leon, and A. Podgurski. Finding failures by cluster analysis of execution profiles. In ICSE'01. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. W. Dickinson, D. Leon, and A. Podgurski. Pursuing failure: the distribution of program failures in a profile space. In ESEC/FSE'01. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. H. Do, S. G. Elbaum, and G. Rothermel. Supporting controlled experimentation with testing techniques: An infrastructure and its potential impact. Empirical Software Engineering: An International Journal, 10(4):405--435, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. N. Gupta, H. He, X. Zhang, and R. Gupta. Locating faulty code using failure-inducing chops. In ASE'05. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. M. Haran, A. Karr, A. Orso, A. Porter, and A. Sanil. Applying classification techniques to remotely collected program execution data. In ESEC/FSE'05. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. J. A. Jones and M. J. Harrold. Empirical evaluation of the tarantula automatic fault-localization technique. In ASE'05. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. M. Kendall and J. D. Gibbons. Rank Correlation Methods. Edward Arnold, 1990.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. B. Liblit, A. Aiken, A. Zheng, and M. Jordan. Bug isolation via remote program sampling. In PLDI'03. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. B. Liblit, M. Naik, A. Zheng, A. Aiken, and M. Jordan. Scalable statistical bug isolation. In PLDI'05. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. C. Liu, X. Yan, L. Fei, J. Han, and S. P. Midkiff. SOBER: statistical model-based bug localization. In ESEC/FSE'05. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. J. I. Marden. Analyzing and Modeling Rank Data. Chapman & Hall/CRC, first edition, 1996.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. G. Misherghi and Z. Su. HDD: Hierarchical delta debugging. In ICSE'06. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. A. Podgurski, D. Leon, P. Francis, W. Masri, M. Minch, J. Sun, and B. Wang. Automated support for classifying software failure reports. In ICSE'03. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. M. Renieris and S. Reiss. Fault localization with nearest neighbor queries. In ASE'03.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. A. Zeller. Isolating cause-effect chains from computer programs. In FSE'02. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. X. Zhang, R. Gupta, and N. Gupta. Locating faults through automated predicate switching. In ICSE'06. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Failure proximity: a fault localization-based approach

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        SIGSOFT '06/FSE-14: Proceedings of the 14th ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on Foundations of software engineering
        November 2006
        298 pages
        ISBN:1595934685
        DOI:10.1145/1181775

        Copyright © 2006 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 5 November 2006

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • Article

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate17of128submissions,13%

        Upcoming Conference

        FSE '24

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader