research-article

Risk-based compatibility analysis in automotive systems engineering

Authors:

Domenik Eichhorn,

Ina SchaeferAuthors Info & Claims

MODELS '20: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems: Companion Proceedings

Article No.: 34, Pages 1 - 10

https://doi.org/10.1145/3417990.3421263

Published: 26 October 2020 Publication History

Abstract

Software is the new leading factor for innovation in the automotive industry. With the increase of software in road vehicles new business models, such as after-sale updates (i.e., Function-on-Demand) and Over-the-Air-Updates come into focus of manufacturers. When updating a road vehicle in the field, it is required to ensure functional safety. An update shall not influence existing functionality and break its safety. Hence, it must be compatible with the existing software. The compatibility of an update is ensured by testing. However, testing all variants of a highly configurable system, such as a modern car's software, is infeasible, due to the combinatorial explosion. To address this problem, in this paper, we propose a risk-based change-impact analysis to identify system variants relevant for retesting after an update. We combine existing concepts from product sampling, risk-based testing, and configuration prioritization and apply them to automotive architectures. For validating our concept, we use the Body Comfort System case study from the automotive industry. Our evaluation reveals that the concept backed by tool support may reduce testing effort by identifying and prioritizing incompatible variants wrt to a system update.

References

[1]

Iago Abal, Claus Brabrand, and Andrzej W\kasowski. 2014. 42 Variability Bugs in the Linux Kernel: A Qualitative Analysis. 421--432.

Digital Library

[2]

Mustafa Al-Hajjaji, Thomas Thüm, Malte Lochau, Jens Meinicke, and Gunter Saake. 2019. Effective Product-Line Testing Using Similarity-Based Product Prioritization. (2019).

[3]

Ståle Amland. 2000. Risk-based testing:: Risk analysis fundamentals and metrics for software testing including a financial application case study. Journal of Systems and Software 53, 3 (2000), 287--295.

Digital Library

[4]

Sven Apel, Don Batory, Christian Kästner, and Gunter Saake. 2013. Feature-Oriented Software Product Lines.

[5]

Hauke Baller. 2014. Towards Incremental Test Suite Optimization for Software Product Lines Categories and Subject Descriptors. Fosd (2014), 30--36.

[6]

Manfred Broy. 2003. Automotive software engineering. 719--720 pages.

[7]

Johannes Bürdek, Timo Kehrer, Malte Lochau, Dennis Reuling, Udo Kelter, and Andy Schürr. 2015. Reasoning about Product-Line Evolution Using Complex Feature Model Differences. 23, 4 (2015), 687--733.

Digital Library

[8]

Vasek Chvatal. 1979. A Greedy Heuristic for the Set-Covering Problem. Math. Oper. Res. 4, 3 (1979), 233--235.

Digital Library

[9]

Myra B Cohen, Matthew B Dwyer, and Jiangfan Shi. 2008. Constructing Interaction Test Suites for Highly-Configurable Systems in the Presence of Constraints: A Greedy Approach. 34, 5 (2008), 633--650.

[10]

Krzysztof Czarnecki and Michal Antkiewicz. 2005. Mapping Features to Models : A Template Approach Based on Superimposed Variants Background : Feature Modeling. Proc. 4th Int. Conf. Gener. Program. Compon. Eng. GPCE 2005 (2005), 422--437. http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/11561347{_}28

[11]

Krzysztof Czarnecki and Ulrich Eisenecker. 2000. Generative Programming: Methods, Tools, and Applications.

Digital Library

[12]

Xavier Devroey, Gilles Perrouin, Maxime Cordy, Pierre-yves Schobbens, Axel Legay, Bretagne Atlantique, and Patrick Heymans. 2014. Towards Statistical Prioritization for Software Product Lines Testing Categories and Subject Descriptors. VaMoS '14 Proc. Eighth Int. Work. Var. Model. Software-Intensive Syst. (2014), Article No. 10. arXiv:1310.2474

[13]

Alireza Ensan, Ebrahim Bagheri, Mohsen Asadi, Dragan Gasevic, and Yevgen Biletskiy. 2011. Goal-oriented test case selection and prioritization for product line feature models. Proc. - 2011 8th Int. Conf. Inf. Technol. New Gener. ITNG 2011 (2011), 291--298.

Digital Library

[14]

Gencer Erdogan, Yan Li, Ragnhild Kobro Runde, Fredrik Seehusen, and Ketil Stølen. 2014. Approaches for the combined use of risk analysis and testing: A systematic literature review. Int. J. Softw. Tools Technol. Transf. 16, 5 (2014), 627--642.

Digital Library

[15]

Michael Felderer and Ina Schieferdecker. 2014. A taxonomy of risk-based testing. Int. J. Softw. Tools Technol. Transf. 16, 5 (2014), 559--568. arXiv:1912.11519

Digital Library

[16]

Hassan Gomaa. 2006. Designing Software Product Lines with UML 2.0: From Use Cases to Pattern-Based Software Architectures Hassan Gomaa Department of Information and Software Engineering 2. Software Product Line Engineering 3. Software Product Line Requirements,. Technology (2006), 7695--7695.

[17]

Herman Hartmann, Frank Van Der Linden, and Jan Bosch. 2014. Risk based testing for software product line engineering. ACM Int. Conf. Proceeding Ser. 1 (2014), 227--231.

Digital Library

[18]

Christopher Henard, Mike Papadakis, Gilles Perrouin, Jacques Klein, Patrick Heymans, and Yves Le Traon. 2014. Bypassing the combinatorial explosion: Using similarity to generate and prioritize t-wise test configurations for software product lines. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 40, 7 (2014), 650--670.

Digital Library

[19]

Martin Fagereng Johansen, Øystein Haugen, and Franck Fleurey. 2012. An Algorithm for Generating T-Wise Covering Arrays from Large Feature Models. 46--55.

Digital Library

[20]

e A. S. Peterson K. C. Kang, S. G. Cohen, J. A. Hess, W. E. Novak. 1990. Feature-Oriented Domain Analysis(FODA) Feasibility Study - A Technical Report. Vol. 98. 269--272 pages. http://www.dtic.mil/docs/citations/ADA235785

[21]

Remo Lachmann. 2017. Black-Box Test Case Selection and Prioritization for Software Variants and Versions. Publ. ... (2017).

[22]

Remo Lachmann, Simon Beddig, Sascha Lity, Sandro Schulze, and Ina Schaefer. 2017. Risk-based integration testing of software product lines. (2017), 52--59.

Digital Library

[23]

Remo Lachmann, Sascha Lity, Sabrina Lischke, Simon Beddig, Sandro Schulze, and Ina Schaefer. 2015. Delta-Oriented Test Case Prioritization for Integration Testing of Software Product Lines. 81--90.

[24]

Jihyun Lee, Sungwon Kang, and Danhyung Lee. 2012. A survey on software product line testing. Proc. 16th Int. Softw. Prod. Line Conf. - SPLC '12 - volume 1 (2012), 31.

Digital Library

[25]

Sascha Lity, Matthias Kowal, and Ina Schaefer. 2016. Higher-order delta modeling for software product line evolution. FOSD 2016 - Proc. 7th Int. Work. Featur. Softw. Dev. co-located with SPLASH 2016 1 (2016), 39--48.

Digital Library

[26]

Sascha Lity, Remo Lachmann, Malte Lochau, and Ina Schaefer. 2015. Delta-oriented Software Product Line Test Models - The Body Comfort System Case Study. 2012 (2015), 302.

[27]

Roberto E. Lopez-Herrejon, Stefan Fischer, Rudolf Ramler, and Alexander Egyed. 2015. A first systematic mapping study on combinatorial interaction testing for software product lines. 2015 IEEE 8th Int. Conf. Softw. Testing, Verif. Valid. Work. ICSTW2015 - Proc. Iwct(2015), 1--10.

[28]

Flávio Medeiros, Christian Kästner, Márcio Ribeiro, Rohit Gheyi, and Sven Apel. 2016. A Comparison of 10 Sampling Algorithms for Configurable Systems. (2016). arXiv:1602.02052

Digital Library

[29]

Tobias Müller, Malte Lochau, Stefan Detering, Falko Saust, Henning Garbers, Lukas Märtin, Thomas Form, and Ursula Goltz. 2009. A comprehensive Description of a Model-based, continuous Development Process for AUTOSAR Systems with integrated Quality Assurance. Technical Report. Technical Report 2009--06, TU Braunschweig.

[30]

Sophia Nahrendorf, Sascha Lity, and Ina Schaefer. 2018. Applying Higher-Order Delta Modeling for the Evolution of Delta-Oriented Software Product Lines. (2018).

[31]

Laí Neves, Paulo Borba, Vander Alves, Lucinéia Turnes, Leopoldo Teixeira, Demostenes Sena, and Uirá Kulesza. 2015. Safe evolution templates for software product lines. J. Syst. Softw. 106 (2015), 42--58.

Digital Library

[32]

Michael Nieke, Jacopo Mauro, Christoph Seidl, Thomas Thüm, Ingrid Chieh Yu, and Felix Franzke. 2018. Anomaly Analyses for Feature-Model Evolution. 188--201.

Digital Library

[33]

Michael Nieke, Christoph Seidl, and Thomas Thuem. 2018. Back to the Future: Avoiding Paradoxes in Feature-Model Evolution. Splc'18 Proc. 22Nd Int. Syst. Softw. Prod. Line Conf. - Vol 2 (2018), 48--51.

Digital Library

[34]

Sebastian Oster, Marius Zink, Malte Lochau, and Mark Grechanik. 2011. Pairwise Feature-interaction Testing for SPLs: Potentials and Limitations. 6:1--6:8.

Digital Library

[35]

Tobias Pett, Thomas Thum, Tobias Runge, Sebastian Krieter, Malte Lochau, and Ina Schaefer. 2019. Product sampling for product lines: The scalability challenge. ACM Int. Conf. Proceeding Ser. A (2019).

Digital Library

[36]

Hans Leo Ross. 2016. Functional safety for road vehicles: New challenges and solutions for E-mobility and automated driving. 1--269 pages.

[37]

Gunter Saake, Andy Sch, and Ebrahim Bagheri. 2017. Similarity-Driven Prioritization and Sampling for Product-Line Testing Mustafa Zaid Saleh Al-Hajjaji. PHD. Otto-von-Guericke-Universität Magdeburg.

[38]

Ana B. Sánchez, Sergio Segura, José A. Parejo, and Antonio Ruiz-Cortés. 2017. Variability testing in the wild: the Drupal case study. Softw. Syst. Model. 16, 1 (2017), 173--194.

Digital Library

[39]

Ina Schaefer. 2010. Variability Modelling for Model-Driven Development of Software Product Lines. VaMoS (2010), 85--92. http://people.cs.clemson.edu/{~}johnmc/courses/cpsc950/paper2.pdf

[40]

Ina Schaefer, Lorenzo Bettini, Viviana Bono, Ferruccio Damiani, and Nico Tanzarella. 2010. Delta-Oriented Programming of Software Product Lines. 77--91.

[41]

Ina Schaefer, Rick Rabiser, Dave Clarke, Lorenzo Bettini, David Benavides, Goetz Botterweck, Animesh Pathak, Salvador Trujillo, and Karina Villela. 2012. Software Diversity: State of the Art and Perspectives. 14, 5 (2012), 477--495.

Digital Library

[42]

Reimar Schröter, Sebastian Krieter, Thomas Thüm, Fabian Benduhn, and Gunter Saake. 2016. Feature-Model Interfaces: The Highway to Compositional Analyses of Highly-Configurable Systems. 667--678.

Digital Library

[43]

Thomas Thüm, Don Batory, and Christian Kästner. 2009. Reasoning about Edits to Feature Models. 254--264.

[44]

Mahsa Varshosaz, Mustafa Al-Hajjaji, Thomas Thüm, Tobias Runge, Mohammad Reza Mousavi, and Ina Schaefer. 2018. A Classification of Product Sampling for Software Product Lines.

Digital Library

Cited By

Dakić PStupavský ITodorović V(2024)The Effects of Global Market Changes on Automotive Manufacturing and Embedded SoftwareSustainability10.3390/su1612492616:12(4926)Online publication date: 8-Jun-2024
https://doi.org/10.3390/su16124926
Pett TKrieter SThüm TSchaefer I(2024)MulTi-Wise Sampling: Trading Uniform T-Wise Feature Interaction Coverage for Smaller SamplesProceedings of the 28th ACM International Systems and Software Product Line Conference10.1145/3646548.3672589(47-53)Online publication date: 2-Sep-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3646548.3672589
Ammermann JBrenneisen FBittner TSchaefer I(2024)Quantum Solution for Configuration Selection and PrioritizationProceedings of the 5th ACM/IEEE International Workshop on Quantum Software Engineering10.1145/3643667.3648221(21-28)Online publication date: 16-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3643667.3648221
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Risk-based compatibility analysis in automotive systems engineering
1. Software and its engineering
  1. Software creation and management
    1. Software verification and validation
      1. Software defect analysis
        Software testing and debugging

Recommendations

Effect of Road Adhesion Coefficient on Tractor-Semitrailer Cornering Braking Stability
MECS '15: Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Mechanical Engineering and Control Systems

A dynamic model of tractor-semitrailer cornering braking was established in this paper, and the accuracy of the model was verified by real vehicle test. By model simulation of the cornering braking process, different road adhesion coefficient such as ...
Analysis of Vehicle Crash Compatibility
ICDMA '12: Proceedings of the 2012 Third International Conference on Digital Manufacturing & Automation

In this study, the basic concepts of vehicle crash compatibility were expatiated. The relation of all influencing factors to vehicle/occupant injuries was analyzed. The status of international and domestic research on crash compatibility were reviewed ...
Proposing HEAVENS 2.0 – an automotive risk assessment model
CSCS '21: Proceedings of the 5th ACM Computer Science in Cars Symposium

Risk-based security models have seen a steady rise in popularity over the last decades, and several security risk assessment models have been proposed for the automotive industry. The new UN vehicle regulation 155 on cybersecurity provisions for vehicle ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

MODELS '20: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems: Companion Proceedings

October 2020

713 pages

ISBN:9781450381352

DOI:10.1145/3417990

Conference Chairs:
Esther Guerra
Universidad Autonoma de Madrid, Spain
,
Ludovico Iovino
Gran Sasso Science Institute, Italy

Copyright © 2020 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 the author(s) 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].

Sponsors

SIGSOFT: ACM Special Interest Group on Software Engineering

In-Cooperation

IEEE CS

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 26 October 2020

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

MODELS '20

Sponsor:

SIGSOFT

MODELS '20: ACM/IEEE 23rd International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems

October 16 - 23, 2020

Virtual Event, Canada

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 144 of 506 submissions, 28%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

8
Total Citations
View Citations
197
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)30
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2

Reflects downloads up to 18 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Dakić PStupavský ITodorović V(2024)The Effects of Global Market Changes on Automotive Manufacturing and Embedded SoftwareSustainability10.3390/su1612492616:12(4926)Online publication date: 8-Jun-2024
https://doi.org/10.3390/su16124926
Pett TKrieter SThüm TSchaefer I(2024)MulTi-Wise Sampling: Trading Uniform T-Wise Feature Interaction Coverage for Smaller SamplesProceedings of the 28th ACM International Systems and Software Product Line Conference10.1145/3646548.3672589(47-53)Online publication date: 2-Sep-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3646548.3672589
Ammermann JBrenneisen FBittner TSchaefer I(2024)Quantum Solution for Configuration Selection and PrioritizationProceedings of the 5th ACM/IEEE International Workshop on Quantum Software Engineering10.1145/3643667.3648221(21-28)Online publication date: 16-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3643667.3648221
Agh HAzamnouri AWagner S(2024)Software product line testing: a systematic literature reviewEmpirical Software Engineering10.1007/s10664-024-10516-x29:6Online publication date: 2-Sep-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10664-024-10516-x
Eichhorn DPett TPrzigoda NKindsvater JSeidl CSchaefer I(2023)Coverage-Driven Test Automation for Highly-Configurable Railway SystemsProceedings of the 17th International Working Conference on Variability Modelling of Software-Intensive Systems10.1145/3571788.3571794(23-30)Online publication date: 25-Jan-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3571788.3571794
Anwar MBucaioni ACiccozzi F(2023)Timing-Aware Variability Resolution in EAST-ADL Product Line Architecture2023 30th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference (APSEC)10.1109/APSEC60848.2023.00059(473-482)Online publication date: 4-Dec-2023
https://doi.org/10.1109/APSEC60848.2023.00059
Knieke CRausch ASchindler MStrasser AVogel M(2022)Managed Evolution of Automotive Software Product Line Architectures: A Systematic Literature StudyElectronics10.3390/electronics1112186011:12(1860)Online publication date: 13-Jun-2022
https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics11121860
Kenner AMay RKrüger JSaake GLeich TMousavi MSchobbens P(2021)Safety, security, and configurable software systemsProceedings of the 25th ACM International Systems and Software Product Line Conference - Volume A10.1145/3461001.3471147(148-159)Online publication date: 6-Sep-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3461001.3471147

View Options

Login options

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

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents