Scoring Device for Static Analysis Warning Prioritization

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing static analysis methods generate a large number of warnings for potential malfunctions, making it difficult to identify significant issues in source code during product development.

Innovation Solution

A scoring device that associates warning types from static analysis with past malfunction causes, using weighting information based on malfunction counts to assign scores to warnings, thereby filtering out less critical alerts and highlighting potential issues.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If static analysis is performed to detect potential malfunctions, then detection capability is improved, but the number of warnings increases making it difficult to identify critical issues

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvedetection capabilityVSAvoidsignal-to-noise ratio

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSLoss of information

Solution Approach 1:

The patent changes the parameter of warning evaluation by introducing scoring based on malfunction cause types and occurrence frequencies. Instead of treating all warnings equally, it assigns different scores based on historical data, transforming the warning information from uniform to differentiated levels of criticality.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The patent introduces an intermediary scoring mechanism that mediates between raw static analysis warnings and final critical issue identification. The score, calculated based on malfunction cause types and frequencies, acts as an intermediary parameter to filter and prioritize warnings.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Ease of operation

If manual weighting is used to prioritize warnings, then ease of operation is improved, but adaptability to different malfunction patterns deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveweighting processVSAvoidadaptability to malfunction patterns

Core Design Contradiction:

Ease of operationVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs self-service by automatically learning from historical malfunction data and generating its own weighting scheme. The scoring device calculates malfunction frequencies and assigns weights automatically without requiring manual intervention, enabling the system to adapt to different malfunction patterns autonomously.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements feedback by using historical malfunction data to continuously improve warning prioritization. The system analyzes past malfunctions, calculates frequencies, and uses this feedback to adjust scoring, creating a closed-loop system that becomes more accurate over time.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS11281566B2Scoring device, computer readable medium, and scoring method

Publication Date: 2022.03.22 MITSUBISHI ELECTRIC CORP

AI summary

Correspondence information has a plurality of records in each of which a first warning type and a first malfunction cause type are associated with each other. Malfunction information has a plurality of second malfunction cause types. A weighting unit determines, by using the malfunction information and the correspondence information, a count of second malfunction cause types each corresponding to the first malfunction cause type. The scoring unit gives a score to the first warning type corresponding to the first malfunction cause type according to the determined count, and generates weighting information in which the first warning type and the score are associated with each other. The scoring unit gives the score having been given to the first warning type to a second warning type corresponding to the first warning type of the weighting information, the analysis result information including the plurality of second warning types.