; Hand this in to:   ece749+hw@ece.cmu.edu

; For scripting purposes please do not use any CURLY BRACES except where we have already done so. 

; Required Readings

@article{maxion00_dependability_cases,
  author = 	"Maxion, R.A., Olszewski, R.T.",
  title =        "Eliminating exception handling errors with dependability cases: a comparative, empirical study",
  organization = "IEEE",
  year =         "2000",
  volume = 	 "29",
  number = 	 "9",
  pages =        "888--906",
  abstract = 	"Programs fail mainly for two reasons: logic errors in the code and exception failures. Exception failures can account for up to two thirds of system crashes, hence, are worthy of serious attention... ",
  url = "http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/iel5/32/19000/00877848.pdf",
  studentname =   "",
  summary =       "",
  contribution1 = "",
  contribution2 = "",
  contribution3 = "",
  contribution4 = "",
  contribution5 = "",
  weakness1 =     "",
  weakness2 =     "",
  weakness3 =     "",
  weakness4 =     "",
  weakness5 =     "",
  interesting =   "high/med/low",
  opinions =      "",
}

; Supplemental Reading

Conference{De Vale02,
   author = "De Vale, J. ; Koopman, P.",
   title  = "Robust software - no more excuses",
   inbook = "Proceedings International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks",
   year = "2002",
   pages = "145-54",
   abstract = "Software developers identify two main reasons why software systems are not made robust: performance and practicality. We demonstrate the effectiveness of general techniques to improve robustness that are practical and yield high performance. We present data from treating three systems to improve robustness by a factor of 5 or more, with a measured performance penalty of under 5% in nearly every case, and usually under 2%. We identify a third possible reason why software systems are not made robust: developer awareness. A case study on three professional development groups evaluated their ability to estimate the robustness of their software. Two groups were able to estimate their software's robustness to some extent, while one group had more divergent results. Although we can overcome the technical challenges, it appears that even experienced developers can benefit from tools to locate robustness failures and training in robustness issues",
   url    = "http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/iel5/7991/22107/01028895.pdf",
   studentname =   "",
   summary =   "",
   contribution1 =   "",
   contribution2 =   "",
   contribution3 =   "",
   contribution4 =   "",
   contribution5 =   "",
   weakness1 =   "",
   weakness2 =   "",
   weakness3 =   "",
   weakness4 =   "",
   weakness5 =   "",
   interesting =   "high/med/low",
   opinions =   "",
}

@Conference{Maxion98,
   author = "Maxion, R.A. ; Olszewski, R.T. ",
   title  = "Improving software robustness with dependability cases",
   inbook = "Digest of Papers. Twenty-Eighth Annual International Symposium on Fault-Tolerant Computing ",
   year = "1998",
   pages = "346-55",
   abstract = "Programs fail mainly for two reasons: logic errors in the code, and exception failures. Exception failures can account for up to 2/3 of system crashes, hence are worthy of serious attention. Traditional approaches to reducing exception failures, such as code reviews, wallthroughs and formal testing, while very useful, are limited in their ability to address a core problem: the programmer's inadequate coverage of exceptional conditions. The problem of coverage might be rooted in cognitive factors that impede the mental generation (or recollection) of exception cases that would pertain in a particular situation, resulting in insufficient software robustness. This paper describes a study to test the hypothesis that robustness for exception failures can be improved through the use of dependability cases. Dependability cases, derived from safety cases, comprise a methodology based on structured taxonomies and memory aids for helping software designer think about and improve exception-handling coverage. A controlled experiment conducted with 59 subjects revealed a statistically significant 43% increase in exception-handling robustness. An ancillary experiment conducted with 38 subjects provides convergent evidence that the effect is authentic, and not due to programming expertise alone",
   url    = "http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/iel4/5640/15114/00689485.pdf",
   studentname =   "",
   summary =   "",
   contribution1 =   "",
   contribution2 =   "",
   contribution3 =   "",
   contribution4 =   "",
   contribution5 =   "",
   weakness1 =   "",
   weakness2 =   "",
   weakness3 =   "",
   weakness4 =   "",
   weakness5 =   "",
   interesting =   "high/med/low",
   opinions =   "",
}