Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Test Driven Development”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2012

Test Driven Development of Scientific Models

Test-Driven Development (TDD) is a software development process that promises many advantages for developer productivity and has become widely accepted among professional software engineers. As the name suggests, TDD practitioners alternate between writing short automated tests and producing code that passes those tests. Although this overly simplified description will undoubtedly sound prohibitively burdensome to many uninitiated developers, the advent of powerful unit-testing frameworks greatly reduces the effort required to produce and routinely execute suites of tests. By testimony, many developers find TDD to be addicting after only a few days of exposure, and find it unthinkable to return to previous practices. Of course, scientific/technical software differs from other software categories in a number of important respects, but I nonetheless believe that TDD is quite applicable to the development of such software and has the potential to significantly improve programmer productivity and code quality within the scientific community. After a detailed introduction to TDD, I will present the experience within the Software Systems Support Office (SSSO) in applying the technique to various scientific applications. This discussion will emphasize the various direct and indirect benefits as well as some of the difficulties and limitations of the methodology. I will conclude with a brief description of pFUnit, a unit testing framework I co-developed to support test-driven development of parallel Fortran applications.

Clune, Thomas L.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Test Driven Development of Scientific Models

Test-Driven Development (TDD), a software development process that promises many advantages for developer productivity and software reliability, has become widely accepted among professional software engineers. As the name suggests, TDD practitioners alternate between writing short automated tests and producing code that passes those tests. Although this overly simplified description will undoubtedly sound prohibitively burdensome to many uninitiated developers, the advent of powerful unit-testing frameworks greatly reduces the effort required to produce and routinely execute suites of tests. By testimony, many developers find TDD to be addicting after only a few days of exposure, and find it unthinkable to return to previous practices.After a brief overview of the TDD process and my experience in applying the methodology for development activities at Goddard, I will delve more deeply into some of the challenges that are posed by numerical and scientific software as well as tools and implementation approaches that should address those challenges.

Overview of TDD Process↗
NASA NTRS2013

Adoption of Test Driven Development and Continuous Integration for the Development of the Trick Simulation Toolkit

This paper describes the adoption of a Test Driven Development approach and a Continuous Integration System in the development of the Trick Simulation Toolkit, a generic simulation development environment for creating high fidelity training and engineering simulations at the NASA/Johnson Space Center and many other NASA facilities. It describes what was learned and the significant benefits seen, such as fast, thorough, and clear test feedback every time code is checked-in to the code repository. It also describes a system that encourages development of code that is much more flexible, maintainable, and reliable. The Trick Simulation Toolkit development environment provides a common architecture for user-defined simulations. Trick builds executable simulations using user-supplied simulation-definition files (S_define) and user supplied "model code". For each Trick-based simulation, Trick automatically provides job scheduling, checkpoint / restore, data-recording, interactive variable manipulation (variable server), and an input-processor. Also included are tools for plotting recorded data and various other supporting tools and libraries. Trick is written in C/C++ and Java and supports both Linux and MacOSX. Prior to adopting this new development approach, Trick testing consisted primarily of running a few large simulations, with the hope that their complexity and scale would exercise most of Trick's code and expose any recently introduced bugs. Unsurprising, this approach yielded inconsistent results. It was obvious that a more systematic, thorough approach was required. After seeing examples of some Java-based projects that used the JUnit test framework, similar test frameworks for C and C++ were sought. Several were found, all clearly inspired by JUnit. Googletest, a freely available Open source testing framework, was selected as the most appropriate and capable. The new approach was implemented while rewriting the Trick memory management component, to eliminate a fundamental design flaw. The benefits became obvious almost immediately, not just in the correctness of the individual functions and classes but also in the correctness and flexibility being added to the overall design. Creating code to be testable, and testing as it was created resulted not only in better working code, but also in better-organized, flexible, and readable (i.e., articulate) code. This was, in essence the Test-driven development (TDD) methodology created by Kent Beck. Seeing the benefits of Test Driven Development, other Trick components were refactored to make them more testable and tests were designed and implemented for them.

Penn, John M.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Testability, Test Automation and Test Driven Development for the Trick Simulation Toolkit

This paper describes the adoption of a Test Driven Development approach and a Continuous Integration System in the development of the Trick Simulation Toolkit, a generic simulation development environment for creating high fidelity training and engineering simulations at the NASA Johnson Space Center and many other NASA facilities. It describes the approach, and the significant benefits seen, such as fast, thorough and clear test feedback every time code is checked into the code repository. It also describes an approach that encourages development of code that is testable and adaptable.

Penn, John↗
NASA NTRS2014

Towards Test Driven Development for Computational Science with pFUnit

Developers working in Computational Science & Engineering (CSE)/High Performance Computing (HPC) must contend with constant change due to advances in computing technology and science. Test Driven Development (TDD) is a methodology that mitigates software development risks due to change at the cost of adding comprehensive and continuous testing to the development process. Testing frameworks tailored for CSE/HPC, like pFUnit, can lower the barriers to such testing, yet CSE software faces unique constraints foreign to the broader software engineering community. Effective testing of numerical software requires a comprehensive suite of oracles, i.e., use cases with known answers, as well as robust estimates for the unavoidable numerical errors associated with implementation with finite-precision arithmetic. At first glance these concerns often seem exceedingly challenging or even insurmountable for real-world scientific applications. However, we argue that this common perception is incorrect and driven by (1) a conflation between model validation and software verification and (2) the general tendency in the scientific community to develop relatively coarse-grained, large procedures that compound numerous algorithmic steps.We believe TDD can be applied routinely to numerical software if developers pursue fine-grained implementations that permit testing, neatly side-stepping concerns about needing nontrivial oracles as well as the accumulation of errors. We present an example of a successful, complex legacy CSE/HPC code whose development process shares some aspects with TDD, which we contrast with current and potential capabilities. A mix of our proposed methodology and framework support should enable everyday use of TDD by CSE-expert developers.

pFUnit↗
DOE OSTI2017

User input verification and test driven development in the NJOY21 nuclear data processing code

Before physically-meaningful data can be used in nuclear simulation codes, the data must be interpreted and manipulated by a nuclear data processing code so as to extract the relevant quantities (e.g. cross sections and angular distributions). Perhaps the most popular and widely-trusted of these processing codes is NJOY, which has been developed and improved over the course of 10 major releases since its creation at Los Alamos National Laboratory in the mid-1970’s. The current phase of NJOY development is the creation of NJOY21, which will be a vast improvement from its predecessor, NJOY2016. Designed to be fast, intuitive, accessible, and capable of handling both established and modern formats of nuclear data, NJOY21 will address many issues that many NJOY users face, while remaining functional for those who prefer the existing format. Although early in its development, NJOY21 is quickly providing input validation to check user input. By providing rapid and helpful responses to users while writing input files, NJOY21 will prove to be more intuitive and easy to use than any of its predecessors. Furthermore, during its development, NJOY21 is subject to regular testing, such that its test coverage must strictly increase with the addition of any production code. This thorough testing will allow developers and NJOY users to establish confidence in NJOY21 as it gains functionality. This document serves as a discussion regarding the current state input checking and testing practices of NJOY21.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
NASA NTRS2014

pFUnit 3.0 Tutorial Advanced

This tutorial will introduce Fortran developers to unit-testing and test-driven development (TDD) using pFUnit. As with other unit-testing frameworks, pFUnit, simplifies the process of writing, collecting, and executing tests while providing clear diagnostic messages for failing tests. pFUnit specifically targets the development of scientific-technical software written in Fortran and includes customized features such as: assertions for multi-dimensional arrays, distributed (MPI) and thread-based (OpenMP) parallellism, and flexible parameterized tests.These sessions will include numerous examples and hands-on exercises that gradually build in complexity. Attendees are expected to have working knowledge of F90, but familiarity with object-oriented syntax in F2003 and MPI will be of benefit for the more advanced examples. By the end of the tutorial the audience should feel comfortable in applying pFUnit within their own development environment.

Test Driven using pFUnit↗
DOE OSTI2022

kynema-fmb [SWR-23-07]

Kynema-FMB (FKA: Kynema) is an open-source performance portable flexible multibody (FMB) dynamics solver designed for time-domain simulations. While originally tailored for wind turbine structural dynamics, the formulation and implementation are those of a general flexible-multidbody dynamics solver that can readily be applied to a wide range of systems. Kynema was designed with a narrow focus, namely to provide a lightweight, fast, accurate FMD solver for coupling to computational-fluid-dynamics (CFD) codes, especially the CFD codes in the Kynema suite, for fluid-structure-interaction (FSI) simulations. Kynema-FMB is equipped to model systems that can be represented as a collection of beams and rigid bodies that are connected through constraints. Degrees of freedom are defined in the inertial/global frame of reference and include displacements and rotations (formally as rotation matrices, but stored as quaternions). The underlying formulation is built on a Lie-group time integrator designed for index-3 differential-algebraic equations, which is second-order accurate in time (Bruls et al., 2012). Beam models are based on geometrically exact beam theory and are discretized as high-order spectral finite elements similar to those in BeamDyn (Wang et al., 2017). The governing equations for a FMD system like a wind turbine constitute a highly nonlinear system of constrained partial-differential equations. Kynema-FMB uses analytical Jacobians in the nonlinear-system solves in each time step. Linear systems use sparse storage and several third-party sparse-linear-system solvers are enabled. Ill conditioning of linear systems is mitigated with preconditioning described in Bottasso et al, 2008. Kynema-FMB is integrated with a simple open-source controller (ROSCO). There is an application programming interface (API) for coupling to geometry-resolved CFD (like that in Sharma et al., 2023) and actuator-force CFD (like that in Kuhn et al., 2025). In the latter, for actuator-line models, Kynema-FMB includes an internal blade-element solver that depends on user-provided lookup tables for coefficients of lift and drag, i.e., aerodynamic polars. Kynema-FMB is written in C++ and leverages Kokkos and Kokkos-Kernels (KokkosEcosystem) as its performance portability layer enabling simulations on both CPU and GPU systems. The repository is equipped with extensive automated testing at the unit and regression/system levels. The following describes the high-level development objectives conceived for Kynema: *Kynema will follow modern software development best practices, including test-driven development (TDD), version control, hierarchical automated testing, and continuous integration (CI) for a robust development environment. *The core data structures are memory efficient and enable vectorization and parallelization at multiple levels. *Data structures are data-oriented to exploit methods for accelerated computing including high utilization of chip resources (e.g., single instruction multiple data (SIMD) instruction sets) and parallelization using GP-GPUs. *The computational algorithms incorporate robust open-source libraries for mathematical operations, resource allocation, and data management. *The API design considers multiple stakeholder needs and ensure integration with existing and future ecosystems for data science, machine learning, and AI. *Kynema-FMB is written in modern C++ and leverages Kokkos as its performance-portability library with inspiration from the kynema stack.

Sprague, MichaelA.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Trajectory Simulation Using Multi Model Monte Carlo with Python (MXMCPy)

EDL (Entry, Descent and Landing) is the process from a vehicle approaching a surface to landing on it, such as a Mars rover approaching the planet before landing. POST2 (Program to Optimize Simulated Trajectories 2) is Langley’s primary EDL simulation tool and is used NASA-wide for simulations. POST2 can generate highly accurate results by running a precise, but time consuming, Monte Carlo (MC) simulation hundreds or thousands of times. Though POST2 can produce highly accurate results, it can take unrealistic time spans to generate these results, which has created a need to speed up the simulations. The new NASA software MXMCPy offers various ways to speed up the simulations while getting just as precise results. Instead of running high-precision POST2 simulations many times for traditional MC, MXMCPy can run fewer high-precision POST2 simulations and many less precise POST2 simulations and merge the results. MXMCPy contains 30+ different methods which will each suggest different allocations between model precision levels, which result in results of varying precision based on the POST2 simulation. I created Python and Bash code to automate the 5 steps of MXMCPy’s application to POST2. I also tested the precision of traditional Monte Carlo simulations to MXMCPy aided simulations and found that MXMCPy can achieve substantially more precise solutions at the same computer runtime. I learned Test Driven Development (TDD), a software programming workflow which involves writing computer-automated tests before writing the code which is being tested. These tests are ran every time the code is changed and they can find glitches in the code much quicker than a human can. This programming workflow saved me a lot of time because the automated tests could tell me exactly where the code had stopped working. I plan on using this software development method for future academic and professional software projects. I have greatly enjoyed my work at NASA, so I have been applying to NASA internships and Pathways positions. In addition, I plan on applying what I have learned about Test Driven Development to my computer science courses next semester

James Warner↗
NASA NTRS2019

Testing Fortran Software with pFunit

Over the past two decades, the emergence of highly effective software testing frameworks has greatly simplified the development and use of unit tests and has led to new software development paradigms such as test driven development (TDD). However, technical computing introduces a number of unique testing challenges, including distributed parallelism and numerical accuracy. This webinar will begin with a basic introduction to the use of pFUnit (parallel Fortran Unit testing framework) to develop tests for Message Passing Interface (MPI) plus Fortran (MPI+Fortran) software and then present some of the new capabilities in the latest release. We will also discuss some specialized methodologies for testing numerical algorithms and speculate about future framework capabilities that may improve our ability to test at exascale.

Clune, Tom↗
NASA NTRS2019

Testing Scientific Software: Challenges and Remedies

Over the past two decades, the emergence of highly effective software testing frameworks has greatly simplified the development and use of unit tests and has led to new software development paradigms such as test driven development (TDD). However, scientific computing introduces a number of unique testing challenges, including numerical algorithms, distributed parallelism, and exascale environments. This presentation will begin with a brief introduction to unit testing, testing frameworks, and some simple examples using pFUnit, a unit testing framework for Fortran + MPI. I will then take a closer look at several of the obstacles one faces when testing technical software and suggest methodologies that can mitigate these difficulties.

Clune, Tom↗
DOE OSTI2025

Event-driven readout development: testing of the EDWARD65P1 chip with integrated event generators

Building on a prototype readout integrated circuit for segmented silicon sensors with the EDWARD event-driven readout architecture, the front-end in each pixel was replaced by a hardware generator to verify readout performance, ensuring no data loss, consistent priority handling, and speed verification. Here, this generator produces Poisson-distributed readout requests with individually tunable rates per pixel via a digitally controlled oscillator. The resulting EDWARD65P1 test ASIC is a 32×32 pixel matrix with a 100 μm pitch, equipped with digital event generators simulating radiation hits at user-defined rates. Test results for this new design are presented.

47 OTHER INSTRUMENTATION↗
NASA NTRS2006

Inspection and Verification of Domain Models with PlanWorks and Aver

When developing a domain model, it seems natural to bring the traditional informal tools of inspection and verification, debuggers and automated test suites, to bear upon the problems that will inevitably arise. Debuggers that allow inspection of registers and memory and stepwise execution have been a staple of software development of all sorts from the very beginning. Automated testing has repeatedly proven its considerable worth, to the extent that an entire design philosophy (Test Driven Development) has been developed around the writing of tests. Unfortunately, while not entirely without their uses, the limitations of these tools and the nature of the complexity of models and the underlying planning systems make the diagnosis of certain classes of problems and the verification of their solutions difficult or impossible. Debuggers provide a good local view of executing code, allowing a fine-grained look at algorithms and data. This view is, however, usually only at the level of the current scope in the implementation language, and the data-inspection capabilities of most debuggers usually consist of on-line print statements. More modem graphical debuggers offer a sort of tree view of data structures, but even this is too low-level and is often inappropriate for the kinds of structures created by planning systems. For instance, god or constraint networks are at best awkward when visualized as trees. Any any non-structural link between data structures, as through a lookup table, isn't captured at all. Further, while debuggers have powerful breakpointing facilities that are suitable for finding specific algorithmic errors, they have little use in the diagnosis of modeling errors.

Bedrax-Weiss, Tania↗