research-article

The case for software evolution

Authors:

Claire Le Goues,

Stephanie Forrest,

Westley WeimerAuthors Info & Claims

FoSER '10: Proceedings of the FSE/SDP workshop on Future of software engineering research

Pages 205 - 210

https://doi.org/10.1145/1882362.1882406

Published: 07 November 2010 Publication History

Abstract

Many software systems exceed our human ability to comprehend and manage, and they continue to contain unacceptable errors. This is an unintended consequence of Moore's Law, which has led to increases in system size, complexity, and interconnectedness. Yet, software is still primarily created, modified, and maintained by humans. The interactions among heterogeneous programs, machines and human operators has reached a level of complexity rivaling that of some biological ecosystems. By viewing software as an evolving complex system, researchers could incorporate biologically inspired mechanisms and employ the quantitative analysis methods of evolutionary biology. This approach could improve our understanding and analysis of software; it could lead to robust methods for automatically writing, debugging and improving code; and it could improve predictions about functional and structural transitions as scale increases. In the short term, an evolutionary perspective challenges several research assumptions, enabling advances in error detection, correction, and prevention.

References

[1]

G. Ammons, R. Bodik, and J. R. Larus. Mining specifications. In Principles of Programming Languages, pages 4--16, 2002.

Digital Library

[2]

J. Anvik, L. Hiew, and G. C. Murphy. Who should fix this bug? In International Conference on Software Engineering, pages 361--370, 2006.

Digital Library

[3]

W. B. Arthur. The Nature of Technology: What it is and How it Evolves. Simon and Schuster, 2009.

[4]

N. Ayewah, D. Hovemeyer, J. D. Morgenthaler, J. Penix, and W. Pugh. Using static analysis to find bugs. IEEE Software, 25(5):22--29, 2008.

Digital Library

[5]

T. Ball and S. K. Rajamani. The SLAM project: debugging system software via static analysis. In Principles of Programming Languages, pages 1--3, 2002.

Digital Library

[6]

G. Barrantes, D. Ackley, S. Forrest, T. Palmer, D. Stefanovic, and D. Zovi. Randomized instruction set emulation to disrupt binary code injection attacks. In Computer and Communications Security, 2003.

Digital Library

[7]

T. V. Belle. Modularity and the Evolution of Software Evolvability. PhD thesis, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, 2004.

Digital Library

[8]

A. Bessey, K. Block, B. Chelf, A. Chou, B. Fulton, S. Hallem, C. Henri-Gros, A. Kamsky, S. McPeak, and D. R. Engler. A few billion lines of code later: using static analysis to find bugs in the real world. Commun. ACM, 53(2):66--75, 2010.

Digital Library

[9]

R. V. Binder. Testing object-oriented systems: models, patterns, and tools. Addison-Wesley, 1999.

Digital Library

[10]

W. R. Bush, J. D. Pincus, and D. J. Sielaff. A static analyzer for finding dynamic programming errors. Softw., Pract. Exper., 30(7):775--802, 2000.

Digital Library

[11]

B. Cox, D. Evans, A. Filipi, J. Rowanhill, W. Hu, J. Davidson, J. Knight, A. Nguyen-Tuong, and J. Hiser. N-variant systems: a secretless framework for security through diversity. In USENIX Security Symposium, 2006.

Digital Library

[12]

S. Forrest, J. Balthrop, M. Glickman, and D. Ackley. Computation in the wild. In E. Jen, editor, Robust Design: A Repertoire of Biological, Ecological, and Engineering Case Studies, pages 207--230. Oxford University Press, 2004. Reprinted in K. Park and W. Willinger Eds. The Internet as a Large-Scale Complex System, pp. 227--250. Oxford University Press (2005).

[13]

S. Forrest, A. Somayaji, and D. H. Ackley. Building diverse computer systems. In Sixth Workshop on Hot Topics in Operating Systems, 1998.

Digital Library

[14]

S. Forrest, W. Weimer, T. Nguyen, and C. Le Goues. A genetic programming approach to automated software repair. In Genetic and Evolutionary Computing Conference, pages 947--954, 2009.

Digital Library

[15]

P. Godefroid, N. Klarlund, and K. Sen. Dart: directed automated random testing. In Programming Language Design and Implementation, pages 213--223, 2005.

Digital Library

[16]

J. Ha, M. Arnold, S. M. Blackburn, and K. S. McKinley. A concurrent dynamic analysis framework for multicore hardware. In Object oriented programming systems languages and applications, pages 155--174, 2009.

[17]

D. Hovemeyer, J. Spacco, and W. Pugh. Evaluating and tuning a static analysis to find null pointer bugs. SIGSOFT Softw. Eng. Notes, 31(1):13--19, 2006.

Digital Library

[18]

W. Hu, J. Hiser, D. Williams, A. Filipi, J. W. Davidson, D. Evans, J. C. Knight, A. Nguyen-Tuong, and J. C. Rowanhill. Secure and practical defense against code-injection attacks using software dynamic translation. In Virtual Execution Environments, pages 2--12, 2006.

Digital Library

[19]

D. Jackson. Alloy: a lightweight object modelling notation. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol., 11(2):256--290, 2002.

Digital Library

[20]

J. A. Jones and M. J. Harrold. Empirical evaluation of the tarantula automatic fault-localization technique. In Automated software engineering, pages 273--282, 2005.

[21]

M. Jorgensen and M. Shepperd. A systematic review of software development cost estimation studies. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 33(1):33--53, 2007.

[22]

X. Leroy. Formal certification of a compiler back-end or: programming a compiler with a proof assistant. In Principles of Programming Languages, pages 42--54, 2006.

Digital Library

[23]

B. Liblit, A. Aiken, A. X. Zheng, and M. I. Jordan. Bug isolation via remote program sampling. In Programming language design and implementation, pages 141--154, 2003.

[24]

B. Nagy, J. D. Farmer, J. E. Trancik, and Q. M. Bui. Testing for laws of technological progress. Santa Fe Institute Technical Report, (2010).

[25]

NIST. The economic impacts of inadequate infrastructure for software testing. Technical Report NIST Planning Report 02-3, NIST, May 2002.

[26]

J. H. Perkins, S. Kim, S. Larsen, S. Amarasinghe, J. Bachrach, M. Carbin, C. Pacheco, F. Sherwood, S. Sidiroglou, G. Sullivan, W.-F. Wong, Y. Zibin, M. D. Ernst, and M. Rinard. Automatically patching errors in deployed software. In Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, pages 87--102, October 2009.

Digital Library

[27]

C. V. Ramamoothy and W.-T. Tsai. Advances in software engineering. IEEE Computer, 29(10):47--58, 1996.

Digital Library

[28]

M. Rinard, C. Cadar, D. Dumitran, D. M. Roy, T. Leu, and W. S. Beebee. Enhancing server availability and security through failure-oblivious computing. In Operating Systems Design and Implementation, pages 303--316, 2004.

Digital Library

[29]

E. M. Rogers. Diffusion of Innovations. Glencoe: Free Press, 1962.

[30]

R. C. Seacord, D. Plakosh, and G. A. Lewis. Modernizing Legacy Systems: Software Technologies, Engineering Process and Business Practices. Addison-Wesley, 2003.

Digital Library

[31]

K. Sen. Concolic testing. In Automated Software Engineering, pages 571--572, 2007.

[32]

S. Srivastava, S. Gulwani, and J. S. Foster. From program verification to program synthesis. In Principles of Programming Languages, pages 313--326, 2010.

Digital Library

[33]

J. Sutherland. Business objects in corporate information systems. ACM Comput. Surv., 27(2):274--276, 1995.

Digital Library

[34]

D. Wagner, J. S. Foster, E. A. Brewer, and A. Aiken. A first step towards automated detection of buffer overrun vulnerabilities. In Networking and Distributed System Security Symposium, Feb. 2000.

[35]

G. Wassermann and Z. Su. Sound and precise analysis of web applications for injection vulnerabilities. In Programming Languages Design and Implementation, pages 32--41, 2007.

Digital Library

[36]

W. Weimer, T. Nguyen, C. Le Goues, and S. Forrest. Automatically finding patches using genetic programming. In International Conference on Software Engineering, pages 364--367, 2009.

Digital Library

[37]

X. Yin, J. C. Knight, E. A. Nguyen, and W. Weimer. Formal verification by reverse synthesis. In Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security, pages 305--319, 2008.

[38]

T. Zimmermann, N. Nagappan, H. Gall, E. Giger, and B. Murphy. Cross-project defect prediction: a large scale experiment on data vs. domain vs. process. In Foundations of Software Engineering, pages 91--100, 2009.

Digital Library

Cited By

Langdon WKrauss OCoello Coello C(2020)Evolving sqrt into 1/x via software data maintenanceProceedings of the 2020 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion10.1145/3377929.3398110(1928-1936)Online publication date: 8-Jul-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3377929.3398110
Rao MBacon DParkes DSeltzer M(2020)Incentivizing Deep Fixes in Software EconomiesIEEE Transactions on Software Engineering10.1109/TSE.2018.284218846:1(51-70)Online publication date: 1-Jan-2020
https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2018.2842188
Le Goues CForrest SWeimer W(2013)Current challenges in automatic software repairSoftware Quality Journal10.1007/s11219-013-9208-021:3(421-443)Online publication date: 1-Sep-2013
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s11219-013-9208-0
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

The case for software evolution

Recommendations

Enhanced opposition-based differential evolution for solving high-dimensional continuous optimization problems
Special Issue on scalability of evolutionary algorithms and other metaheuristics for large-scale continuous optimization problems

This paper presents a novel algorithm based on generalized opposition-based learning (GOBL) to improve the performance of differential evolution (DE) to solve high-dimensional optimization problems efficiently. The proposed approach, namely GODE, ...
Centroid Opposition-Based Differential Evolution

The capabilities of evolutionary algorithms (EAs) in solving nonlinear and non-convex optimization problems are significant. Differential evolution (DE) is an effective population-based EA, which has emerged as very competitive. Since its inception in ...
Ensemble of clearing differential evolution for multi-modal optimization
ICSI'12: Proceedings of the Third international conference on Advances in Swarm Intelligence - Volume Part I

Multi-modal Optimization refers to finding multiple global and local optima of a function in one single run, so that the user can have a better knowledge about different optimal solutions. Multiple global/local peaks generate extra difficulties for the ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

FoSER '10: Proceedings of the FSE/SDP workshop on Future of software engineering research

November 2010

460 pages

ISBN:9781450304276

DOI:10.1145/1882362

General Chair:
Gruia-Catalin Roman
Washington University in St. Louis, USA
,
Program Chair:
Kevin Sullivan
University of Virginia, USA

Copyright © 2010 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]

Sponsors

SIGSOFT: ACM Special Interest Group on Software Engineering

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 07 November 2010

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

SIGSOFT/FSE'10

Sponsor:

SIGSOFT

SIGSOFT/FSE'10: 18th ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering

November 7 - 8, 2010

New Mexico, Santa Fe, USA

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

4
Total Citations
View Citations
278
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)8
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

Reflects downloads up to 14 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Langdon WKrauss OCoello Coello C(2020)Evolving sqrt into 1/x via software data maintenanceProceedings of the 2020 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion10.1145/3377929.3398110(1928-1936)Online publication date: 8-Jul-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3377929.3398110
Rao MBacon DParkes DSeltzer M(2020)Incentivizing Deep Fixes in Software EconomiesIEEE Transactions on Software Engineering10.1109/TSE.2018.284218846:1(51-70)Online publication date: 1-Jan-2020
https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2018.2842188
Le Goues CForrest SWeimer W(2013)Current challenges in automatic software repairSoftware Quality Journal10.1007/s11219-013-9208-021:3(421-443)Online publication date: 1-Sep-2013
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s11219-013-9208-0
Yamakami T(2011)A cognitively meaningful digital ecosystem approach: Implications for mobile digital ecosystem5th IEEE International Conference on Digital Ecosystems and Technologies (IEEE DEST 2011)10.1109/DEST.2011.5936626(203-207)Online publication date: May-2011
https://doi.org/10.1109/DEST.2011.5936626

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