RU2811421C1 - Method for testing electronic devices based on automatic test generation - Google Patents

Abstract

FIELD: computer technology.

SUBSTANCE: method contains the following steps: implementing hardware-software models (HSM) of electronic devices; with the help of these HSMs, control actions (CAs) are issued to the tested electronic devices (TED) in the form of electrical signals, and response reactions (RRs) are measured in the form of electrical signals received from the TED; typical operations are defined that are planned to be used for testing a specific TED; a basic test is formed consisting of certain standard operations; based on the basic test, derivative tests are generated, with a modified sequence of issuance and the composition of standard operations, while maintaining the standard composition of operations. Based on the generated derivative test, the TED is tested by issuing CAs in the form of electrical signals and reading the RRs.

EFFECT: expanded functionality of tests due to formation of derivative tests with an increased number of instances of operations.

1 cl

Description

The invention relates to computer systems based on specific mathematical models, and can be used for testing electronic devices.

Within the framework of this application, a test is a set of test influences issued according to a specific algorithm and the corresponding permissible deviations of the controlled parameters of devices.

There is a known method for testing electronic devices based on the formation of tests (RF patent No. 2413976). The method consists in determining standard operations that are planned to be used for testing a specific object; form a test consisting of previously defined standard instances of operations.

The disadvantage of this method is low functionality, due to the lack of an algorithm for automatically generating derivative tests, with an increased number of operation instances, based on a basic test, with a small number of operation instances.

There is a known method for testing electronic devices based on the formation of tests (RF patent No. 2469372). The method consists in determining standard operations that are planned to be used for testing a specific object; form a test consisting of previously defined standard instances of operations.

The disadvantage of this method is low functionality, due to the lack of an algorithm for automatically generating derivative tests, with an increased number of operation instances, based on a basic test, with a small number of operation instances.

The closest (prototype) is the method of testing electronic devices based on the formation of tests: S.S. Marenina, M.V. Salmina Automation of creating testing procedures for on-board equipment in a problem-oriented language // Reshetnev Readings: materials of the XX International Scientific Conference, Krasnoyarsk. – 2016. – pp. 221–223. The method consists in determining standard operations that are planned to be used for testing a specific object; form a basic test consisting of previously defined standard operations; then, based on this basic test, derivative tests are generated, with a modified issuance sequence and the composition of instances of standard operations, while maintaining the standard composition of operations.

The disadvantage of this method is low functionality, due to the lack of an algorithm for automatically generating derivative tests, with an increased number of operation instances, based on a basic test, with a small number of operation instances.

For the claimed method, essential features common to the prototype have been identified: a method for testing electronic devices based on the automatic generation of tests, in which standard operations are determined that are planned to be used for testing a specific object; form a basic test consisting of previously defined standard operations; then, based on this basic test, derivative tests are generated, with a modified issuance sequence and the composition of instances of standard operations, while maintaining the standard composition of operations.

The technical problem of the claimed invention is the elimination of this drawback, which will make it possible to automatically generate derivative tests, with an increased number of operation instances, based on the basic test, with a small number of operation instances, thereby increasing the functionality of the tests.

The technical problem of the invention is solved by the fact that according to the method of testing electronic devices based on the automatic generation of tests, with the help of special control and testing equipment (KIA) and the software that controls it, hardware-software models (HSM) of electronic devices are implemented. Then, using these APMs, control actions (IEDs) are issued to the electronic devices under test (IED) in the form of electrical signals, and, using the same APMs, the response reactions (OR) are measured in the form of electrical signals received from the IED. Define typical operations that are planned to be used for testing a particular IED. Next, a basic test is formed, consisting of previously defined standard operations and, based on this basic test, derivative tests are formed, with a modified issuance sequence and composition of instances of standard operations, while maintaining the standard composition of operations. Derived tests are formed by counting the number of instances of operations for each type in the base test, thereby obtaining coefficients , Where – number of types of operations. Count the total number of operations all types in the basic test. Then calculate the density coefficients for the occurrence of operations of each type in the basic test . Rank types of operations by indicator the type of operation with the highest density coefficient is given first place , to the latter with the lowest density coefficient , thereby obtaining the rank coefficient , which can take values from 0 to n. Calculate coefficients for determining types of operations by adding all density coefficients lower in rank compared to the one for which the count is being made . The cycle of generating new instances of operations begins, for which a pseudo-random value is generated from 0 to 1 with a uniform probability distribution, where – the number of instances of operations that need to be generated. Consistently compare with every , until the condition is met , thereby getting , in accordance with which the type of the next operation that needs to be added to the generated derivative test is determined. Add the computed instance of the operation to the derived test. Repeat iterations of the cycle of generating new instances of operations times, thereby obtaining a derived test. Based on the generated derivative test, the IED is tested by issuing CF in the form of electrical signals and reading the OP.

The method is carried out as follows.

Based on the test tasks of a particular IED, the typical operations that are planned to be used for its testing are determined.

Type is a form, type of something that has certain similar characteristics (https://ozhegov.textologia.ru/definit/tip/?q=742&n=183674).

Typification - subsuming under any type, classification by type. (https://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/dic_economic_law/16048/%D0%A2%D0%98%D0%9F%D0%98%D0%97%D0%90%D0%A6%D0% 98%D0%AF).

That is, the specialist conducting the tests, on the basis of his technical knowledge and experience, determines what operations in the form of issuing CVs and reading OPs must be carried out to determine, during the tests, the necessary characteristics of the IED. For example, an IED is an on-board computing device of a spacecraft, then the operations can be, for example, issuing command signals via the interface of a multiplex information exchange channel (MKIO) in accordance with GOST R 5207-2003 or a request to read the OR from the IED via the same interface. It is possible to carry out such an operation, for example, using the TE1-PCI2 device (http://www.elcus.ru/boards.php?ID=te1-pci2) installed in the PCI connector of a personal computer. Or the operation could be issuing a shock in the form of supplying power to the IED by switching a software-controlled relay, for example, using the NI PXI-2570 device (https://www.ni.com/ru-ru/support/model.pxi-2570 .html) or a request to read the voltage level in a specific electrical circuit of the IED, for example, using the NI PXI-4072 device (https://www.ni.com/ru-ru/support/model.pxi-4072.html).

Thus, it is possible to determine the characteristics of the IED, such as, for example: the exchange function via the IED, the response time via the IED, the on/off function of the IED, the voltage level in the sections of the IED circuit, the resistance level in the sections of the IED circuit, the current strength in the sections of the IED circuit, exchange functions via various digital and analog interfaces, etc.

After the specialist conducting the tests has determined the set of operations he needs to test the IED, he typifies them, for example, he decides to issue 20 identical shock waveforms according to MKIO in a certain sequence at different points in time. That is, it is necessary to issue the same OC 20 times (repeatedly), therefore, this operation is typical within the framework of this test, then the specialist designates it as typical and assigns it a unique name within the framework of this test, for example, “KU1”. Also, during the tests, he decides to issue OP requests for MKIO 30 times in a certain sequence at different points in time. That is, it is necessary to request the same OP 30 times (repeatedly), therefore, this operation is typical within the framework of this test, then the specialist designates it as typical and assigns it a unique name within the framework of this test, for example, “KU2”. Or a specialist decides to issue 15 identical ICs using NI PXI-2570 in a certain sequence at different points in time. That is, it is necessary to issue the same OC 15 times (repeatedly), therefore, this operation is typical within the framework of this test, then the specialist designates it as typical and assigns it a unique name within the framework of this test, for example, “KU3”. Also, during the tests, he decides to issue OP requests on the NI PXI-4072 45 times in a certain sequence at different points in time. That is, it is necessary to request the same OP 45 times (repeatedly), therefore, this operation is typical within the framework of this test, then the specialist designates it as typical and assigns it a unique name within the framework of this test, for example, “KU4” and etc.

Then KU1, KU2, KU3 and KU4 form the “Typical composition of operations”, that is, the standard composition of operations is formed by the specialist conducting the tests by typing the “Typical operations” repeated many times in the compiled test program. Or this process can be automated by automatically counting the number of identical (or very similar) repeated operations.

Next, a basic test is formed, consisting of previously defined standard operations. For example, a basic test consists of the following sequence of 30 commands: control command (KU)1, KU4, KU4, KU2, KU3, KU1, KU4, KU4, KU0, KU1, KU0, KU0, KU0, KU2, KU4, KU0, KU0, KU1 , KU2, KU4, KU4, KU0, KU1, KU2, KU4, KU4, KU4, KU2, KU2, KU4. In this case, the order of the CP can be changed without disrupting the operation of the test process, and each CP can contain nested operations, for example, CP0 consists of issuing data to the IED, reading the OP, analyzing the read OP, issuing, based on the analysis results, the next IED portions of data and reading the next OP. KU1 consists of reading data from the IED, analyzing the read data and, on its basis, issuing data to the IED and reading the OP. KU2 consists of issuing one piece of data to the IED. KU3 and KU4 consist of one reading of a piece of data from the IED. Next, based on this basic test, derivative tests are generated, with a modified issuance sequence and the composition of instances of standard operations, while maintaining the standard composition of operations. To do this, first count the number of instances of operations for each type in the basic test, thereby obtaining the coefficients , Where – number of types of operations. Important! For convenience and uniformity in the description of calculations, numbered starting from 0, i.e. for five types of operations, takes values from 0 to 4. For the example given, we get: for KU0 = 7 for KU1 = 5 for KU2 = 6 for KU3 = 1 for KU4 = 11. Next, calculate the total number of operations all types in the basic test, for example Calculate the density coefficients for the occurrence of operations of each type in the basic test , for example ; . Rank types of operations by indicator the type of operation with the highest density coefficient is given first place , to the latter with the lowest density coefficient , thereby obtaining the rank coefficient , which can take values from 0 to n. For example, we get: For ; For ; For ; For ; For . Calculate coefficients for determining types of operations by adding all density coefficients lower in rank compared to the one for which the count is being made . For example, we get: ; ; ; ; The cycle of generating new instances of operations begins, for which a pseudo-random value is generated from 0 to 1 with a uniform probability distribution, where – the number of instances of operations that need to be generated. Consistently compare with every , until the condition is met , thereby getting , in accordance with which the type of the next operation that needs to be added to the generated derivative test is determined. Add the computed instance of the operation to the derived test. Repeat iterations of the cycle of generating new instances of operations times, thereby obtaining a derived test. For example: generate , which corresponds to KU4 , , which means adding the operation KU4 to the derived test; generate , which corresponds to KU4 , , which means adding the operation KU4 to the derived test; generate , But , which corresponds to KU0 , , which means adding the operation KU0 to the derived test; generate , , But , which corresponds to KU2 , , which means adding the operation KU2 to the derived test; generate , , , But , which corresponds to KU1 , , which means adding the operation KU1 to the derived test; generate , , , , But , which corresponds to KU3 , , which means adding the operation KU3 to the derived test. Continue generating operations as many times as required for the derived test, for example 5000000000 times, which takes a few seconds using modern computing technology.

Calculated derivative tests for the example given in the description of the implementation of this invention:

90 operations. KU4, KU1, KU2, KU4, KU4, KU0, KU1, KU0, KU4, KU2, KU4, KU3, KU1, KU0, KU2, KU0, KU1, KU1, KU0, KU2, KU1, KU3, KU4, KU0, KU4, KU2, KU4, KU4, KU4, KU0, KU4, KU2, KU4, KU0, KU2, KU4, KU4, KU3, KU4, KU0, KU1, KU4, KU4, KU2, KU0, KU4, KU0, KU4, KU0, KU4, KU4, KU1, KU2, KU0, KU2, KU0, KU0, KU4, KU2, KU4, KU2, KU4, KU0, KU0, KU4, KU2, KU4, KU1, KU4, KU1, KU4, KU4, KU2, KU0, KU4, KU1, KU4, KU1, KU0, KU1, KU2, KU2, KU4, KU2, KU4, KU2, KU1, KU0, KU0, KU1.

120 operations. KU4, KU3, KU2, KU2, KU4, KU4, KU4, KU0, KU2, KU1, KU0, KU0, KU4, KU0, KU2, KU2, KU3, KU2, KU2, KU4, KU4, KU0, KU4, KU0, KU0, KU1, KU4, KU0, KU4, KU2, KU2, KU1, KU0, KU0, KU4, KU4, KU2, KU0, KU1, KU0, KU0, KU4, KU4, KU2, KU3, KU1, KU0, KU0, KU4, KU2, KU4, KU4, KU2, KU2, KU0, KU1, KU4, KU4, KU0, KU4, KU1, KU1, KU2, KU1, KU2, KU3, KU4, KU4, KU0, KU4, KU1, KU0, KU4, KU4, KU2, KU1, KU0, KU1, KU1, KU2, KU4, KU4, KU1, KU4, KU4, KU0, KU4, KU4, KU2, KU0, KU1, KU2, KU4, KU4, KU1, KU0, KU4, KU4, KU2, KU4, KU4, KU2, KU0, KU4, KU4, KU0, KU4, KU1, KU4, KU0, KU0, KU1, KU2, KU4, KU1, KU4, KU0, KU2, KU4, KU1.

Using the special KIA described above (MKIO, relay switches, etc.) and the software that controls it, the APM of electronic devices is implemented. With the help of these APM, tests are carried out by issuing SW to the IED, in the form of electrical signals, and measuring OR, in the form of electrical signals received from the IED.

The technical result of the invention is that in the proposed test method, in contrast to the prototype, an algorithm is described for the automatic generation of derivative tests, with an increased number of operation instances, based on the basic test, with a small number of operation instances, which increases the functionality of the tests.

Claims (1)

A method for testing electronic devices based on the automatic generation of tests, in which, with the help of control and testing equipment and software that controls it, hardware and software models (HSM) of electronic devices are implemented; with the help of these APMs, control actions (IEDs) are issued to the electronic devices under test (IED) in the form of electrical signals, and with the help of the same APMs, responses (RE) are measured in the form of electrical signals received from the IED; define typical operations that are planned to be used for testing a specific IED; form a basic test consisting of previously defined standard operations; then, based on this basic test, derivative tests are formed with a modified issuance sequence and the composition of instances of standard operations while maintaining the standard composition of operations, characterized in that the number of instances of operations for each type in the basic test is counted, thereby obtaining coefficients , Where - number of types of operations; count the total number of operations all types in the basic test; calculate the density coefficients for the occurrence of operations of each type in the basic test ; rank types of operations by indicator the type of operation with the highest density coefficient is given first place , for the latter - with the lowest density coefficient , thereby obtaining the rank coefficient , which can take values from 0 to n; calculate coefficients for determining types of operations by adding all density coefficients , which are lower in rank in comparison with the one for which the calculation is being carried out ; begin the cycle of generating new instances of operations, for which they generate a pseudo-random value from 0 to 1 with a uniform probability distribution, where - the number of instances of operations that need to be generated; consistently compare with every until the condition is met ; thereby getting , in accordance with which the type of the next operation that needs to be added to the generated derivative test is determined; add the computed instance of the operation to the derived test; repeat iterations of the cycle of generating new instances of operations times, thereby obtaining a derived test; Based on the generated derivative test, the IED is tested by issuing CF in the form of electrical signals and reading the OP.