Comparing software measures with fault counts derived from unit-testing of safety-critical software

  • Authors:
  • Wolfgang Herzner;Stephan Ramberger;Thomas Länger;Christian Reumann;Thomas Gruber;Christian Sejkora

  • Affiliations:
  • Division Information Technologies, ARC Seibersdorf Research, Tech Gate Vienna, Vienna, Austria;Division Information Technologies, ARC Seibersdorf Research, Tech Gate Vienna, Vienna, Austria;Division Information Technologies, ARC Seibersdorf Research, Tech Gate Vienna, Vienna, Austria;Division Information Technologies, ARC Seibersdorf Research, Tech Gate Vienna, Vienna, Austria;Division Information Technologies, ARC Seibersdorf Research, Tech Gate Vienna, Vienna, Austria;Division Information Technologies, ARC Seibersdorf Research, Tech Gate Vienna, Vienna, Austria

  • Venue:
  • SAFECOMP'05 Proceedings of the 24th international conference on Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security
  • Year:
  • 2005

Quantified Score

Hi-index 0.00

Visualization

Abstract

Systematic validation and verification of safety-critical software is of crucial importance. A key precaution is intensive testing at several levels, from the entire system down to individual functional elements, the latter often carried out as unit testing. This paper presents results from a unit test performed on a C++ package from a testbed of a safety critical application at the ARC Seibersdorf research lab. After outlining the test environment and relevant characteristics of the tested software package, a detailed analysis of the test results is given. This analysis comprises fault categorization, fault distribution, relations between software metrics (like McCabe's cyclomatic complexity or the risk categories of NASA SATC), software faults, and testing efforts, and yields clues about the significance of these measures for fault probabilities. A summary of the findings and related work conclude the paper.