Debugging is one of the most time-consuming and expensive tasks in software development. Several formula-based fault localization (FBFL) methods have been proposed, but they fail to guarantee a set of diagnoses across all failing tests or may produce redundant diagnoses that are not subset-minimal, particularly for programs with multiple faults. This paper introduces a novel fault localization approach for C programs with multiple faults. CFaults leverages Model-Based Diagnosis (MBD) with multiple observations and aggregates all failing test cases into a unified MaxSAT formula. Consequently, our method guarantees consistency across observations and simplifies the fault localization procedure. Experimental results on two benchmark sets of C programs, TCAS and C-Pack-IPAs, show that CFaults is faster than other FBFL approaches like BugAssist and SNIPER. Moreover, CFaults only generates subset-minimal diagnoses of faulty statements, whereas the other approaches tend to enumerate redundant diagnoses.

Reasoning about unpredicted change consists in explaining observations by events; we propose here an approach for explaining time-stamped observations by surprises, which are simple events consisting in the change of the truth value of a fluent. A framework for dealing with surprises is defined. Minimal sets of surprises are provided together with time intervals where each surprise has occurred, and they are characterized from a model-based diagnosis point of view. Then, a probabilistic approach of surprise minimisation is proposed.

Traditional model-based diagnosis relies on constructing explicit system models, a process that can be laborious and expertise-demanding. In this paper, we propose a novel framework that combines concepts of model-based diagnosis with deep graph structure learning. This data-driven approach leverages data to learn the system's underlying structure and provide dynamic observations, represented by two distinct graph adjacency matrices. Our work facilitates a seamless integration of graph structure learning with model-based diagnosis by making three main contributions: (i) redefining the constructs of system representation, observations, and faults (ii) introducing two distinct versions of a self-supervised graph structure learning model architecture and (iii) demonstrating the potential of our data-driven diagnostic method through experiments on a system of coupled oscillators.

In the modern world, we are permanently using, leveraging, interacting with, and relying upon systems of ever higher sophistication, ranging from our cars, recommender systems in e-commerce, and networks when we go online, to integrated circuits when using our PCs and smartphones, the power grid to ensure our energy supply, security-critical software when accessing our bank accounts, and spreadsheets for financial planning and decision making. The complexity of these systems coupled with our high dependency on them implies both a non-negligible likelihood of system failures, and a high potential that such failures have significant negative effects on our everyday life. For that reason, it is a vital requirement to keep the harm of emerging failures to a minimum, which means minimizing the system downtime as well as the cost of system repair. This is where model-based diagnosis comes into play. Model-based diagnosis is a principled, domain-independent approach that can be generally applied to troubleshoot systems of a wide variety of types, including all the ones mentioned above, and many more. It exploits and orchestrates i.a. techniques for knowledge representation, automated reasoning, heuristic problem solving, intelligent search, optimization, stochastics, statistics, decision making under uncertainty, machine learning, as well as calculus, combinatorics and set theory to detect, localize, and fix faults in abnormally behaving systems. In this thesis, we will give an introduction to the topic of model-based diagnosis, point out the major challenges in the field, and discuss a selection of approaches from our research addressing these issues.

This work proposes a taxonomy for diagnosis computation methods which allows their standardized assessment, classification and comparison. The aim is to (i) give researchers and practitioners an impression of the diverse landscape of available diagnostic techniques, (ii) allow them to easily retrieve the main features as well as pros and cons of the approaches, (iii) enable an easy and clear comparison of the techniques based on their characteristics wrt. a list of important and well-defined properties, and (iv) facilitate the selection of the "right" algorithm to adopt for a particular problem case, e.g., in practical diagnostic settings, for comparison in experimental evaluations, or for reuse, modification, extension, or improvement in the course of research.

Increasing complexity of technical systems requires a precise fault localization in order to reduce maintenance costs and system downtimes. Model-based diagnosis has been presented as a method to derive root causes for observed symptoms, utilizing a description of the system to be diagnosed. Practical applications of model-based diagnosis, however, are often prevented by the initial modeling task and computational complexity associated with diagnosis. In the proposed thesis, we investigate techniques addressing these issues. In particular, we utilize a mapping function which converts fault information available in practice into propositional horn logic sentences to be used in abductive model-based diagnosis. Further, we plan on devising algorithms which allow an efficient computation of explanations given the obtained models.

I report on my experience over the past few years in introducing automated, model-based diagnostic technologies into industrial settings. In partic-ular, I discuss the competition that this technology has been receiving from handcrafted, rule-based diagnostic systems that has set some high standards that must be met by model-based systems before they can be viewed as viable alternatives. The battle between model-based and rule-based approaches to diagnosis has been over in the academic literature for many years, but the situation is different in industry where rule-based systems are dominant and appear to be attractive given the considerations of efficiency, embeddability, and cost effectiveness. My goal in this article is to provide a perspective on this competition and discuss a diagnostic tool, called DTOOL/CNETS, that I have been developing over the years as I tried to address the major challenges posed by rule-based systems. In particular, I discuss three major features of the developed tool that were either adopted, designed, or innovated to address these challenges: (1) its compositional modeling approach, (2) its structure-based computational approach, and (3) its ability to synthesize embeddable diagnostic systems for a variety of software and hardware platforms.

Statistical samples, in order to be representative, have to be drawn from a population in a random and unbiased way. Nevertheless, it is common practice in the field of model-based diagnosis to make estimations from (biased) best-first samples. One example is the computation of a few most probable possible fault explanations for a defective system and the use of these to assess which aspect of the system, if measured, would bring the highest information gain. In this work, we scrutinize whether these statistically not well-founded conventions, that both diagnosis researchers and practitioners have adhered to for decades, are indeed reasonable. To this end, we empirically analyze various sampling methods that generate fault explanations. We study the representativeness of the produced samples in terms of their estimations about fault explanations and how well they guide diagnostic decisions, and we investigate the impact of sample size, the optimal trade-off between sampling efficiency and effectivity, and how approximate sampling techniques compare to exact ones.

A common issue for companies is that the volume of product orders may at times exceed the production capacity. We formally introduce two novel problems dealing with the question which orders to discard or postpone in order to meet certain (timeliness) goals, and try to approach them by means of model-based diagnosis. In thorough analyses, we identify many similarities of the introduced problems to diagnosis problems, but also reveal crucial idiosyncracies and outline ways to handle or leverage them. Finally, a proof-of-concept evaluation on industrial-scale problem instances from a well-known scheduling benchmark suite demonstrates that one of the two formalized problems can be well attacked by out-of-the-box model-based diagnosis tools.

Machine learning promises to revolutionize clinical decision making and diagnosis. In medical diagnosis a doctor aims to explain a patient’s symptoms by determining the diseases causing them. However, existing machine learning approaches to diagnosis are purely associative, identifying diseases that are strongly correlated with a patients symptoms. We show that this inability to disentangle correlation from causation can result in sub-optimal or dangerous diagnoses. To overcome this, we reformulate diagnosis as a counterfactual inference task and derive counterfactual diagnostic algorithms. We compare our counterfactual algorithms to the standard associative algorithm and 44 doctors using a test set of clinical vignettes. While the associative algorithm achieves an accuracy placing in the top 48% of doctors in our cohort, our counterfactual algorithm places in the top 25% of doctors, achieving expert clinical accuracy. Our results show that causal reasoning is a vital missing ingredient for applying machine learning to medical diagnosis. In medical diagnosis a doctor aims to explain a patient’s symptoms by determining the diseases causing them, while existing diagnostic algorithms are purely associative. Here, the authors reformulate diagnosis as a counterfactual inference task and derive new counterfactual diagnostic algorithms.