A software release game was formulated by Zeephongsekul and Chiera [Zeephongsekul, P. & Chiera, C. (1995). Optimal software release policy based on a two-person game of timing. Journal of Applied Probability 32: 470–481] and was reconsidered by Dohi et al. [Dohi, T., Teraoka, Y., & Osaki, S. (2000). Software release games. Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications 105(2): 325–346] in a framework of two-person nonzero-sum games. In this paper, we further point out the faults in the above literature and revisit the Nash equilibrium strategies in the software release games from the viewpoints of both silent and noisy type of games. It is shown that the Nash equilibrium strategies in the silent and noisy of software release games exist under some parametric conditions.

In this paper, we consider a failure point process related to the Markovian arrival process defined by Neuts. We show that it converges in distribution to a homogeneous Poisson process. This convergence takes place in the context of rare occurrences of failures. We also provide a convergence rate of the convergence in total variation of this point process using an approach developed by Kabanov, Liptser and Shiryaev for the doubly stochastic Poisson process driven by a finite Markov process.

This paper considers a competing risks system with p pieces of software where each piece follows the model by Littlewood (1980) described as follows. The failure rate of a piece of software relies on the residual number of bugs remaining in the software where each bug produces failures at varying rates. In effect, bugs with higher failure rates tend to be observed earlier in the testing period. Tasks are assigned to the system and the task completion times as well as the software failure times are assumed to be independent of each other. The system is observed over a fixed testing period and the system reliability upon test termination is examined. An estimator of the system reliability is presented and its asymptotic properties as well as finite-sample properties are obtained.

Testing in order to produce software of high reliability is an area of major concern in software engineering. In an effort to find efficient methods of testing, the comparison of partition and random sampling testing methods has received considerable attention in the literature. A standard criterion for comparisons between random and partition testing, based on their expected efficacy in program debugging, is the probability of detecting at least one failure causing input in the program's domain. However, the goal in software testing is usually to find as many faults as possible in a reasonable period of time, and therefore stochastic comparisons of the number of faults obtained in partition and random testing may provide more valuable information on which testing procedures to use. We establish various conditions which guarantee that the number of faults discovered in partition testing is stochastically greater than the number discovered in random testing (using a fixed total sample size) for many of the well-established stochastic orders (including the usual stochastic order, the hazard rate order, the likelihood ratio order, and the variability order). The results established also allow us to obtain both upper and lower bounds with these stochastic orders for the sum of n independent Bernoulli random trials (with varying probability of success) in terms of the binomial distribution with parameters n and p.