Skip to main content

Evolving a Safe System Design Iteratively

  • Conference paper
Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security (SAFECOMP 2010)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 6351))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

ARP4754 suggests that, whenever possible, aeronautical safety critical systems may be developed as well as checked in an incremental way. But in practice the safe design emerges from the functional essential design in a discontinuous fashion. Engineers take several decisions in the direction of safety that sometimes can loose some of the desired functional characteristics. This can increase the development cost by only detecting functional problems in late phases of the development life cycle. In this paper we propose a strategy that starts from an initial proposed design, where functional behavior is investigated using model checking, and evolves to a reliable and safe design in a stepwise fashion. At each step, where safety aspects are introduced, safety constraints are checked using probabilistic model checking (Markov analysis). The final design emerges when we cannot find any safety violation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Prism and CSP models, http://www.cin.ufpe.br/~acm/ecs/

  2. Guidelines and Methods for Conducting the Safety Assessment Process on Civil Airborne Systems. Aerospace Recommended Practice ARP4761, SAE International, Warrendale, PA (December 1996)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Alexander, R., Herbert, N., Kelly, T.: Deriving Safety Requirements for Autonomous Systems. In: 4th SEAS DTC Technical Conference (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Alexander, R.D., Kelly, T.P.: Escaping the non-quantitative trap. In: 27th International System Safety Conference, pp. 69–95 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bozzano, M., Villafiorita, A.: Improving system reliability via model checking: The FSAP/NuSMV-SA safety analysis platform. In: Anderson, S., Felici, M., Littlewood, B. (eds.) SAFECOMP 2003. LNCS, vol. 2788, pp. 49–62. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Damasceno, A., Farias, A., Mota, A.: A Mechanised Strategy for Safe Abstraction of CSP Specifications (Best paper). In: Brazilian Symposium on Formal Methods, vol. 12, pp. 118–133 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Ebeling, C.E.: An Introduction to Reliability and Maintainability Engineering, 2nd Har/Cdr edn. Waveland Pr Inc., Prospect Heights (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Kerlund, O.A., et al.: ISAAC, a framework for integrated safety analysis of functional, geometrical and human aspects. In: European Congress on Embedded Real Time Software, ERTS 2006 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Farias, A., Mota, A., Sampaio, A.: Compositional Abstraction of CSP Z Processes. Journal of the Brazilian Computer Society 14(2) (June 2008)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Goldsmith, M.: FDR: User Manual and Tutorial, version 2.77. Formal Systems (Europe) Ltd. (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Gomes, A.J.O.: Model based safety analysis using probabilistic model checking. Master’s thesis, Federal University of Pernambuco (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Grunske, L., Colvin, R., Winter, K.: Probabilistic Model-Checking Support for FMEA. In: QEST 2007: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Quantitative Evaluation of Systems, pp. 119–128. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Isobe, Y., Roggenbach, M.: Csp-prover – a proof tool for the verification of scalable concurrent systems. Journal of Computer Software, Japan Society for Software Science and Technology (JSSST) 25, 85–92 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Jesus, J.B.J.: Designing and formal verification of fly-by-wire flight control systems. Master’s thesis, Federal University of Pernambuco (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kwiatkowska, M., Norman, G., Parker, D.: Probabilistic model checking for performance and reliability analysis. ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review 36(4), 40–45 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Laurent, O.: Using formal methods and testability concepts in the avionics systems validation and verification (v&v) process. In: 2008 International Conference on Software Testing, Verification, and Validation, pp. 1–10 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Lisagor, O., Kelly, T.: Incremental safety assessment: Theory and practice. In: 26th International System Safety Conference, published by the System Safety Society (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Lisagor, O., McDermid, J., Pumfrey, D.J.: Towards a practicable process for automated safety analysis. In: 24th International System Safety Conference, pp. 596–607 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  19. The MathWorks Inc. Simulink Validation and Verification 2 User’s Guide (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Morgan, C.: Programming from Specifications, 2nd edn. Prentice Hall International (UK) Ltd., Englewood Cliffs (1994)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Papadopoulos, Y., McDermid, J., Sasse, R., Heiner, G.: Analysis and synthesis of the behaviour of complex programmable electronic systems in conditions of failure. Reliability Engineering & System Safety 71(3), 229–247 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Ramos, R., Sampaio, A., Mota, A.: Conformance notions for the coordination of interaction components. Science of Computer Programming 75(5), 350–373 (2010)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Roscoe, A.: The Theory and Practice of Concurrency. Prentice Hall PTR, Englewood Cliffs (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Soares, G., Gheyi, R., Massoni, T., Cornelio, M., Cavalcanti, D.: Generating unit tests for checking refactoring safety. In: Brazilian Symposium on Programming Languages, pp. 159–172 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Stephenson, Z., McDermid, J., Choy, J.: Using simulation to validate style-specific architectural refactoring patterns. In: SEW 2006: Proceedings of the 30th Annual IEEE/NASA Software Engineering Workshop, pp. 123–132. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  26. Zeyda, F., Cavalcanti, A.: Mechanised Translation of Control Law Diagrams into Circus. In: Leuschel, M., Wehrheim, H. (eds.) IFM 2009. LNCS, vol. 5423, pp. 151–166. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Mota, A., Jesus, J., Gomes, A., Ferri, F., Watanabe, E. (2010). Evolving a Safe System Design Iteratively. In: Schoitsch, E. (eds) Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security. SAFECOMP 2010. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6351. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15651-9_27

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15651-9_27

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-15650-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-15651-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics