English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Modified condition/decision coverage (MC/DC) is a structural code coverage metric, originally defined in the standard DO-178B, intended to be an efficient coverage metric for the evaluation of the testing process of software incorporating decisions with complex Boolean expressions. The upcoming standard ISO 26262 for safety-relevant automotive systems prescribes MC/DC for ASIL D as a highly recommended coverage metric. One assumed benefit of MC/DC is that it requires a much smaller number of test cases in comparison to multiple condition coverage (MCC), while sustaining a quite high error-detection probability. Programming languages like C, commonly used for implementing software for the automotive domain, are using short-circuit evaluation. For short-circuit evaluation the number of test cases for MCC is much smaller than in a non-short-circuit environment because many redundant test cases occur. We evaluated the trade-off between the number of test cases for MCC and MC/DC for a case study from the automotive domain and observed a very low overhead (only 5 %) for the number of test cases necessary for MCC compared to MC/DC. This motivated an analysis of programs containing decisions where the number and structure of the referring Boolean expressions vary. Our results show that the overhead for a test suite for MCC is on the average only about 35 % compared to MC/DC and the maximum overhead is approximately 100 % (for decisions with up to 5 conditions). This means that a test set for MCC is in the worst case around twice as big as a test set for MC/DC for a program with short-circuit evaluation with maximum 5 conditions. Considering the lower error-detection effectiveness of MC/DC compared to MCC, we conclude with the strong recommendation to use MCC as a coverage metric for testing safety-relevant software (with a limited number of conditions) implemented in programming languages with short-circuit evaluation.

Reasonability of MC/DC for safety-relevant software implemented in programming languages with short-circuit evaluation