Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

BDDs Strike Back

Efficient Analysis of Static and Dynamic Fault Trees

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
NASA Formal Methods (NFM 2022)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 13260))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Fault trees are a key model in reliability analysis. Classical static fault trees (SFT) can best be analysed using binary decision diagrams (BDD). State-based techniques are favorable for the more expressive dynamic fault trees (DFT). This paper combines the best of both worlds by following Dugan’s approach: dynamic sub-trees are analysed via model checking Markov models and replaced by basic events capturing the obtained failure probabilities. The resulting SFT is then analysed via BDDs. We implemented this approach in the Storm model checker. Extensive experiments (a) compare our pure BDD-based analysis of SFTs to various existing SFT analysis tools, (b) indicate the benefits of our efficient calculations for multiple time points and the assessment of the mean-time-to-failure, and (c) show that our implementation of Dugan’s approach significantly outperforms pure Markovian analysis of DFTs. Our implementation Storm-dft is currently the only tool supporting efficient analysis for both SFTs and DFTs.

This work has been partially funded by NWO under the grant PrimaVera number NWA.1160.18.238, European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement No. 101008233 (Mission), and the ERC Consolidator Grant 864075 (CAESAR). Khan is funded by a HEC-DAAD stipend.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
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

Notes

  1. 1.

    https://www.stormchecker.org/.

  2. 2.

    https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6390998.

  3. 3.

    https://www.stormchecker.org/.

  4. 4.

    https://dftbenchmarks.utwente.nl/galileo.html.

  5. 5.

    https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6390998.

  6. 6.

    https://github.com/rakhimov/scram.

  7. 7.

    https://altarica-association.org/members/arauzy/Software/XFTA/XFTA2.html.

  8. 8.

    https://github.com/rakhimov/scram/tree/develop/input/Aralia.

References

  1. Akers, S.B., Jr.: Binary decision diagrams. IEEE Trans. Comput. 27(6), 509–516 (1978)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Andrews, J.D., Bartlett, L.M.: Efficient basic event orderings for binary decision diagrams. In: Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, pp. 61–68. IEEE (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bäckström, O., Gamble, R., Krcal, P., Wang, W.: An experimental assessment of the MCS BDD algorithm in RiskSpectrum. In: Safety and Reliability-Safe Societies in a Changing World, pp. 1709–1717. CRC Press (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bäckström, O., Butkova, Y., Hermanns, H., Krčál, J., Krčál, P.: Effective static and dynamic fault tree analysis. In: Skavhaug, A., Guiochet, J., Bitsch, F. (eds.) SAFECOMP 2016. LNCS, vol. 9922, pp. 266–280. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45477-1_21

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Baier, C., Haverkort, B.R., Hermanns, H., Katoen, J.P.: Model-checking algorithms for continuous-time Markov chains. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 29(6), 524–541 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Basgöze, D.: Dynamic fault tree analysis using binary decision diagrams. Bachelor thesis, RWTH Aachen University (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Basgöze, D., Volk, M., Katoen, J., Khan, S., Stoelinga, M.: BDDs strike back: efficient analysis of static and dynamic fault trees. CoRR abs/2202.02829 (2022)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Birnbaum, Z.: On the importance of different components in a multicomponent system. Multivariate Analysis-II, pp. 581–592 (1969)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bohnenkamp, H., Haverkort, B.: The mean value of the maximum. In: Hermanns, H., Segala, R. (eds.) PAPM-PROBMIV 2002. LNCS, vol. 2399, pp. 37–56. Springer, Heidelberg (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45605-8_4

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Boudali, H., Crouzen, P., Stoelinga, M.: A rigorous, compositional, and extensible framework for dynamic fault tree analysis. IEEE Trans. Dependable Secur. Comput. 7(2), 128–143 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bouissou, M., Bruyere, F., Rauzy, A.: BDD based fault-tree processing: a comparison of variable ordering heuristics. In: European Safety and Reliability Association Conference, ESREL (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Brace, K.S., Rudell, R.L., Bryant, R.E.: Efficient implementation of a BDD package. In: DAC, pp. 40–45. IEEE Computer Society Press (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Bryant, R.E.: Graph-based algorithms for Boolean function manipulation. IEEE Trans. Comput. 35(8), 677–691 (1986)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Bryant, R.E.: Binary decision diagrams. In: Handbook of Model Checking, pp. 191–217. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10575-8_7

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Budde, C.E., Ruijters, E., Stoelinga, M.: The dynamic fault tree rare event simulator. In: Gribaudo, M., Jansen, D.N., Remke, A. (eds.) QEST 2020. LNCS, vol. 12289, pp. 233–238. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-59854-9_17

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Cheok, M.C., Parry, G.W., Sherry, R.R.: Use of importance measures in risk-informed regulatory applications. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 60(3), 213–226 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Coudert, O., Madre, J.C.: Fault tree analysis: 10/sup 20/prime implicants and beyond. In: Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, pp. 240–245. IEEE (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Davis, P.J., Rabinowitz, P.: Methods of Numerical Integration. Academic Press, Cambridge (1984)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. van Dijk, T.: Sylvan: multi-core decision diagrams. Ph.D. thesis, University of Twente, The Netherlands (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  20. van Dijk, T., van de Pol, J.: Sylvan: multi-core framework for decision diagrams. Int. J. Softw. Tools Technol. Transf. 19(6), 675–696 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Dugan, J.B., Bavuso, S.J., Boyd, M.A.: Fault trees and sequence dependencies. In: Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, pp. 286–293 (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Dugan, J.B., Bavuso, S.J., Boyd, M.A.: Dynamic fault-tree models for fault-tolerant computer systems. IEEE Trans. Reliab. 41(3), 363–377 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Dugan, J.B., Venkataraman, B., Gulati, R.: DIFtree: a software package for the analysis of dynamic fault tree models. In: Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, pp. 64–70. IEEE (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Dutuit, Y., Rauzy, A.: A linear-time algorithm to find modules of fault trees. IEEE Trans. Reliab. 45(3), 422–425 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Dutuit, Y., Rauzy, A.: Efficient algorithms to assess component and gate importance in fault tree analysis. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 72(2), 213–222 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Eijkhout, V.: Introduction to High Performance Scientific Computing. lulu.com (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Federal Aviation Administration: System safety handbook (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Fussell, J.: How to hand-calculate system reliability and safety characteristics. IEEE Trans. Reliab. 24(3), 169–174 (1975)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Ghadhab, M., Junges, S., Katoen, J.P., Kuntz, M., Volk, M.: Safety analysis for vehicle guidance systems with dynamic fault trees. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 186, 37–50 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Guennebaud, G., Jacob, B., et al.: Eigen v3 (2010). http://eigen.tuxfamily.org

  31. Gulati, R., Dugan, J.B.: A modular approach for analyzing static and dynamic fault trees. In: Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, pp. 57–63. IEEE (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Hensel, C., Junges, S., Katoen, J.P., Quatmann, T., Volk, M.: The probabilistic model checker storm. Int. J. Softw. Tools Technol. Transf. 1–22 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10009-021-00633-z

  33. ISO: ISO 26262: Road vehicles - Functional safety. Standard, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Junges, S., Katoen, J.-P., Stoelinga, M., Volk, M.: One net fits all. In: Khomenko, V., Roux, O.H. (eds.) PETRI NETS 2018. LNCS, vol. 10877, pp. 272–293. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91268-4_14

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  35. Krcál, J., Krcál, P.: Scalable analysis of fault trees with dynamic features. In: DSN, pp. 89–100. IEEE Computer Society (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Mo, Y.: A multiple-valued decision-diagram-based approach to solve dynamic fault trees. IEEE Trans. Reliab. 63(1), 81–93 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Moinuddin, K., Innocent, J., Keshavarz, K.: Reliability of sprinkler system in Australian shopping centres-a fault tree analysis. Fire Saf. J. 105, 204–215 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Montani, S., Portinale, L., Bobbio, A., Raiteri, D.C.: Radyban: a tool for reliability analysis of dynamic fault trees through conversion into dynamic Bayesian networks. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 93(7), 922–932 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Raiteri, D.C.: The conversion of dynamic fault trees to stochastic Petri nets, as a case of graph transformation. Electron. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 127(2), 45–60 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Rakhimov, O.: Scram probabilistic risk analysis tool (2018). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1146337

  41. Rao, K.D., Gopika, V., Rao, V.V.S.S., Kushwaha, H.S., Verma, A.K., Srividya, A.: Dynamic fault tree analysis using Monte Carlo simulation in probabilistic safety assessment. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 94(4), 872–883 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Rauzy, A.: Some disturbing facts about depth-first left-most variable ordering heuristics for binary decision diagrams. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part O: J. Risk Reliab. 222(4), 573–582 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Rauzy, A.: New algorithms for fault trees analysis. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 40(3), 203–211 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Rauzy, A.: Sequence algebra, sequence decision diagrams and dynamic fault trees. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 96(7), 785–792 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Rauzy, A.: Probabilistic safety analysis with XFTA. AltaRica Association (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  46. Ruijters, E., et al.: FFORT: a benchmark suite for fault tree analysis. In: ESREL. Singapore: Research Publishing (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  47. Ruijters, E., Stoelinga, M.: Fault tree analysis: a survey of the state-of-the-art in modeling, analysis and tools. Comput. Sci. Rev. 15, 29–62 (2015)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  48. Shannon, C.E.: A symbolic analysis of relay and switching circuits. Electr. Eng. 57(12), 713–723 (1938)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Sinnamon, R.M., Andrews, J.: Improved efficiency in qualitative fault tree analysis. Qual. Reliab. Eng. Int. 13(5), 293–298 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Sinnamon, R.M., Andrews, J.D.: Fault tree analysis and binary decision diagrams. In: Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, pp. 215–222. IEEE (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  51. Stamatelatos, M., Vesely, W., Dugan, J., Fragola, J., Minarick, J., Railsback, J.: Fault Tree Handbook with Aerospace Applications. NASA, Washington, DC (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  52. Steven, E., Antoine, R.: Open-PSA Model Exchange Format. The Open-PSA Initiative (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  53. Sullivan, K.J., Dugan, J.B., Coppit, D.: The Galileo fault tree analysis tool. In: FTCS, pp. 232–235. IEEE Computer Society (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  54. Trivedi, K.S., Bobbio, A.: Reliability and Availability Engineering - Modeling, Analysis, and Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2017)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  55. Trivedi, K.S., Sahner, R.A.: SHARPE at the age of twenty two. SIGMETRICS Perform. Eval. Rev. 36(4), 52–57 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Volk, M., Junges, S., Katoen, J.P.: Fast dynamic fault tree analysis by model checking techniques. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 14(1), 370–379 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Volk, M., Weik, N., Katoen, J.-P., Nießen, N.: A DFT modeling approach for infrastructure reliability analysis of railway station areas. In: Larsen, K.G., Willemse, T. (eds.) FMICS 2019. LNCS, vol. 11687, pp. 40–58. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27008-7_3

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  58. Xing, L., Tannous, O., Dugan, J.B.: Reliability analysis of nonrepairable cold-standby systems using sequential binary decision diagrams. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A 42(3), 715–726 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Yevkin, O.: An improved modular approach for dynamic fault tree analysis. In: Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, pp. 1–5. IEEE (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  60. Zhou, S., Xiang, J., Wong, W.E.: Reliability analysis of dynamic fault trees with spare gates using conditional binary decision diagrams. J. Syst. Softw. 170, 110766 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Software Modeling and Verification, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany

    Daniel Basgöze, Joost-Pieter Katoen & Shahid Khan

  2. Formal Methods and Tools, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands

    Matthias Volk, Joost-Pieter Katoen & Marielle Stoelinga

  3. Department of Software Science, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Marielle Stoelinga

Authors
  1. Daniel Basgöze
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Matthias Volk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Joost-Pieter Katoen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Shahid Khan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Marielle Stoelinga
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matthias Volk .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Jyotirmoy V. Deshmukh

  2. Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, USA

    Klaus Havelund

  3. National Institute of Aerospace, Hampton, VA, USA

    Ivan Perez

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Basgöze, D., Volk, M., Katoen, JP., Khan, S., Stoelinga, M. (2022). BDDs Strike Back. In: Deshmukh, J.V., Havelund, K., Perez, I. (eds) NASA Formal Methods. NFM 2022. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 13260. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-06773-0_38

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-06773-0_38

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-06772-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-06773-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation