Downloads provided by UsageCounts
Concurrency bugs are notoriously hard to detect and reproduce. Controlled concurrency testing (CCT) techniques aim to offer a solution, where a scheduler explores the space of possible interleavings of a concurrent program looking for bugs. Since the set of possible interleavings is typically very large, these schedulers employ heuristics that prioritize the search to "interesting" subspaces. However, current heuristics are typically tuned to specific bug patterns, which limits their effectiveness in practice. In this artifact, we present QL, a learning-based CCT framework where the likelihood of an action being selected by the scheduler is influenced by earlier explorations. We leverage the classical Q-learning algorithm to explore the space of possible interleavings, allowing the exploration to adapt to the program under test, unlike previous techniques. We have implemented and evaluated QL on a set of microbenchmarks, complex protocols, as well as production cloud services. In our experiments, we found QL to consistently outperform the state-of-the-art in CCT. Please refer to the README file for more details on how to run the artifact.
reinforcement learning, concurrency, testing, model checking
reinforcement learning, concurrency, testing, model checking
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
| views | 124 | |
| downloads | 10 |

Views provided by UsageCounts
Downloads provided by UsageCounts