Robustness Testing of Autonomy Software

被引:39
作者
Hutchison, Casidhe [1 ]
Zizyte, Milda [2 ]
Lanigan, Patrick E. [1 ]
Guttendorf, David [1 ]
Wagner, Michael [1 ]
Le Goues, Claire [3 ]
Koopman, Philip [2 ]
机构
[1] Carnegie Mellon Univ, Natl Robot Engn Ctr, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA
[2] Carnegie Mellon Univ, Dept Elect & Comp Engn, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA
[3] Carnegie Mellon Univ, Sch Comp Sci, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA
来源
2018 IEEE/ACM 40TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SOFTWARE ENGINEERING - SOFTWARE ENGINEERING IN PRACTICE TRACK (ICSE-SEIP 2018) | 2018年
关键词
dependability; robustness testing; safety-critical systems; autonomy; FAULT;
D O I
10.1145/3183519.3183534
中图分类号
TP31 [计算机软件];
学科分类号
081202 ; 0835 ;
摘要
As robotic and autonomy systems become progressively more present in industrial and human-interactive applications, it is increasingly critical for them to behave safely in the presence of unexpected inputs. While robustness testing for traditional software systems is long-studied, robustness testing for autonomy systems is relatively uncharted territory. In our role as engineers, testers, and researchers we have observed that autonomy systems are importantly different from traditional systems, requiring novel approaches to effectively test them. We present Automated Stress Testing for Autonomy Architectures (ASTAA), a system that effectively, automatically robustness tests autonomy systems by building on classic principles, with important innovations to support this new domain. Over five years, we have used ASTAA to test 17 real-world autonomy systems, robots, and robotics-oriented libraries, across commercial and academic applications, discovering hundreds of bugs. We outline the ASTAA approach and analyze more than 150 bugs we found in real systems. We discuss what we discovered about testing autonomy systems, specifically focusing on how doing so differs from and is similar to traditional software robustness testing and other high-level lessons.
引用
收藏
页码:276 / 285
页数:10
相关论文
共 47 条
[21]  
Kane A., 2015, THESIS
[22]   A Case Study on Runtime Monitoring of an Autonomous Research Vehicle (ARV) System [J].
Kane, Aaron ;
Chowdhury, Omar ;
Datta, Anupam ;
Koopman, Philip .
RUNTIME VERIFICATION, RV 2015, 2015, 9333 :102-117
[23]   Monitor Based Oracles for Cyber-Physical System Testing [J].
Kane, Aaron ;
Fuhrman, Thomas ;
Koopman, Philip .
2014 44TH ANNUAL IEEE/IFIP INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON DEPENDABLE SYSTEMS AND NETWORKS (DSN), 2014, :148-155
[24]   Analyses of robot systems using fault and event trees: Case studies [J].
Khodabandehloo, K .
RELIABILITY ENGINEERING & SYSTEM SAFETY, 1996, 53 (03) :247-264
[25]  
Koopman Philip., 2008, Interface Robustness Testing: Experience and Lessons Learned from the Ballista Project, chapter 11, P201
[26]  
Koopman Philip., 2010, BETTER EMBEDDED SYST
[27]   Automated robustness testing of Off-The-Shelf software components [J].
Kropp, NP ;
Koopman, PJ ;
Siewiorek, DP .
TWENTY-EIGHTH ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON FAULT-TOLERANT COMPUTING, DIGEST PAPERS, 1998, :230-239
[28]   Software fault interactions and implications for software testing [J].
Kuhn, DR ;
Wallace, DR ;
Gallo, AM .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SOFTWARE ENGINEERING, 2004, 30 (06) :418-421
[29]   Approach to Fault Identification for Electronic Products Using Mahalanobis Distance [J].
Kumar, Sachin ;
Chow, Tommy W. S. ;
Pecht, Michael .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT, 2010, 59 (08) :2055-2064
[30]   Robustness testing of the windows DDK [J].
Mendonca, Manuel ;
Neves, Nuno .
37TH ANNUAL IEEE/IFIP INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON DEPENDABLE SYSTEMS AND NETWORKS, PROCEEDINGS, 2007, :554-+