Analyzing the reliability of communication between software entities using a 3D visualization of clustered graphs

ABSTRACT

Modern software systems are typically composed of a large number of components, and more and more functionality is realized through the communication between these components. In this paper, we present an approach that enables assessing the reliability of the components and the communication between them. A protocol for testing the communication is presented and applied to several systems. After the execution of this protocol, an error rate is known for each component and each communication link of the system. This information is transformed into a graph containing the information about the components and their known communication relations. Finally, these graphs are analyzed using a 3D visualization based on a clustered force-directed layout. Major benefits of this approach include a method for assessing the reliability of components that are not directly accessible and a visualization that optimally supports the analysis of graphs in this application domain.

References

1. AspectJ. http://www.eclipse.org/aspectj. Last access: 25.03.2008.
2. Balzer, M., Noack, A., Deussen, O., and Lewerentz, C. 2004. Software Landscapes: Visualizing the Structure of Large Software Systems. In VisSym 2004, Symposium on Visualization, Konstanz, Germany, May 19--21, 2004, Eurographics Association, O. Deussen, C. D. Hansen, D. A. Keim, and D. Saupe, Eds., 261--266.
3. Barborak, M., Malek, M., and Dahbura, A. T. 1993. The Consensus Problem in Fault-Tolerant Computing. ACM Computing Surveys 25, 2 (June), 171--220.
4. Barnes, J., and Hut, P. 1986. A hierarchical O(N logN) force calculation algorithm. Nature 324, 4, 446--449.
5. Battista, G. D., Eades, P., Tamassia, R., and Tollis, I. G. 1998. Graph Drawing: Algorithms for the Visualization of Graphs.
6. Dwyer, T. 2005. Extending the WilmaScope 3D graph visualisation system: software demonstration. In APVis '05: proceedings of the 2005 Asia-Pacific symposium on Information visualisation, Australian Computer Society, Inc., Darlinghurst, Australia, Australia, 39--45.
7. Eades, P., and Huang, M. L. 2000. Navigating Clustered Graphs using Force-Directed Methods. J. Graph Algorithms and Applications: Special Issue on Selected Papers from 1998 Symp. Graph Drawing 4, 3, 157--181.
8. Eades, P. A. 1984. A heuristic for graph drawing. In Congressus Numerantium, vol. 42, 149--160.
9. Eiglsperger, M., Kaufmann, M., and Siebenhaller, M. 2003. A topology-shape-metrics approach for the automatic layout of UML class diagrams. In SoftVis '03: Proceedings of the 2003 ACM symposium on Software visualization, ACM, New York, NY, USA, 189--ff.
10. Feng, Q. 1997. Algorithms for Drawing Clustered Graphs. PhD thesis, The University of Newcastle, Australia.
11. Frick, A., Ludwig, A., and Mehldau, H. 1994. A Fast Adaptive Layout Algorithm for Undirected Graphs. In Proc. DIMACS Int. Work. Graph Drawing, GD, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, R. Tamassia and I. G. Tollis, Eds., no. 894, 388--403.
12. Fruchterman, T. M. J., and Reingold, E. M. 1991. Graph Drawing by Force-directed Placement. Software - Practice and Experience 21, 11, 1129--1164.
13. Gajer, P., Goodrich, M. T., and Kobourov, S. G. 2004. A multi-dimensional approach to force-directed layouts of large graphs. Computational Geometry 29, 1, 3--18.
14. Gutwenger, C., Jünger, M., Klein, K., Kupke, J., Leipert, S., and Mutzel, P. 2003. A new approach for visualizing UML class diagrams. In SoftVis '03: Proceedings of the 2003 ACM symposium on Software visualization, ACM, New York, NY, USA, 179--188.
15. Harel, D., and Koren, Y. 2002. A Fast Multi-Scale Algorithm for Drawing Large Graphs. Journal of Graph Algorithms and Applications 6, 3, 179--202.
16. Kalcklösch, R., and Liggesmeyer, P. 2006. Communication test for object-oriented systems using gossiped data (fast abstract). In First Workshop on Model-Based Testing MOTES'06, INFORMATIK 2006 - Informatik fr Menschen, Band 2, volume P-94 of Lecture Notes in Informatics, Series of the Gesellschaft fr Informatik, C. Hochberger and R. Liskowsky, Eds., 282--283.
17. Kuhl, J. G., and Reddy, S. M. 1980. Distributed fault-tolerance for large multiprocessor systems. In ISCA '80: Proceedings of the 7th Annual Symposium on Computer Architecture, ACM Press, New York, NY, USA, La Baule, United States, 23--30.
18. Parker, G., Franck, G., and Ware, C. 1998. "visualization of large nested graphs in 3d: Navigation and interaction". Journal of Visual Languages and Computing 9, 3, 299--317.
19. Preparata, F. P., Metze, G., and Chien, R. T. 1967. On the Connection Assignment Problem of Diagnosable Systems. IEEE Transactions on Electronic Computers EC-16, 6 (December), 848--854.
20. Quigley, A., and Eades, P. 2001. FADE: Graph Drawing, Clustering, and Visual Abstraction. In GD '00: Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium on Graph Drawing, Springer-Verlag, London, UK, 197--210.
21. Ritter, J. 1990. An efficient bounding sphere. In Graphics Gems. Academic Press Professional, Inc., San Diego, CA, USA, 301--303.
22. Sprenger, T. C., Brunella, R., and Gross, M. H. 2000. H-BLOB: A Hierarchical Visual Clustering Method Using Implicit Surfaces. In VISUALIZATION '00: Proceedings of the 11th IEEE Visualization 2000 Conference (VIS 2000), IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA.
23. Walshaw, C. 2003. A Multilevel Algorithm for Force-Directed Graph Drawing. J. Graph Algorithms Appl. 7, 3, 253--285.
24. Ware, C., and Franck, G. 1996. Evaluating stereo and motion cues for visualizing information nets in three dimensions. ACM Trans. Graph. 15, 2, 121--140.
25. Ware, C., and Mitchell, P. 2005. Reevaluating stereo and motion cues for visualizing graphs in three dimensions. In APGV '05: Proceedings of the 2nd symposium on Applied perception in graphics and visualization, ACM, New York, NY, USA, 51--58.

Index Terms

• Applied computing

  • Document management and text processing

    • Document capture

      • Graphics recognition and interpretation

• Computing methodologies

  • Computer graphics

• Software and its engineering

  • Software creation and management

    • Software verification and validation

      • Software defect analysis

        • Software testing and debugging