Advertisement

A Pattern-Based Approach towards the Guided Reuse of Safety Mechanisms in the Automotive Domain

  • Maged Khalil
  • Alejandro Prieto
  • Florian Hölzl
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8822)

Abstract

The reuse of architectural measures or safety mechanisms is widely-spread in practice, especially in well-understood domains, as is reusing the corresponding safety-case to document the fulfillment of the target safety goal(s). This seems to harmonize well with the fact that safety standards recommend (if not dictate) performing many analyses during the concept phase of development as well as the early adoption of multiple measures at the architectural design level. Yet this front-loading is hindered by the fact that safety argumentation is not well-integrated into architectural models in the automotive domain and as such does not support comprehensible and reproducible argumentation nor any evidence for argument correctness. The reuse is neither systematic nor adequate.

Using a simplified description of safety mechanisms, we defined a pattern library capturing known solution algorithms and architectural measures/constraints in a seamless holistic model-based approach with corresponding tool support. Based on a meta-model encompassing both development artifacts and safety case elements, the pattern library encapsulates all the information necessary for reuse, which can then be integrated into existing development environments. This paper explores the model and the approach using an illustrative implementation example, along with the supporting workflow for the usage of the approach in both “designer” and “user” roles.

Keywords

Safety-critical systems pattern-based design architectures safety cases automotive reuse 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    ISO 26262 Standard, Road Vehicles Functional Safety (2011), www.iso.org
  2. 2.
    Lindstrom, D.R.: Five Ways to Destroy a Development Project. IEEE Software, 55–58 (September 1993)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kelly, T., McDermid, J.: Safety case construction and reuse using patterns. In: 16th International Conference on Computer Safety, Reliability and Security, SAFECOMP (1997)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wagner, S., Schätz, B., Puchner, S., Kock, P.: A Case Study on Safety Cases in the Automotive Domain: Modules, Patterns, and Models. In: Proc. International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering (ISSRE 2010). IEEE Computer Society (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Origin Consulting (York) Limited, on behalf of the Contributors.“Goal Structuring Notation (GSN)”. GSN COMMUNITY STANDARD VERSION 1 (November 2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    The ITEA2 SAFE Project / The EUROSTARS SAFE-E Project, www.safe-project.eu
  7. 7.
    The SAFE / SAFE-E Consortium. Deliverable D3.1.3 / D3.4, Proposal for extension of Meta-model for safety-case modeling and documentation (2013), http://www.safe-project.eu
  8. 8.
    AutoFOCUS 3, research CASE tool, af3.fortiss.org, 2014 fortiss GmbH Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Khalil, M.: Pattern-based methods for model-based safety-critical software architecture design. In: ZeMoSS 2013 Workshop at the SE 2013 in Aachen, Germany (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Voss, S., Schätz, B., Khalil, M., Carlan, C.: A step towards Modular Certification using integrated model-based Safety Cases. In: VeriSure 2013 (2013)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Weaver, R.: The Safety of Software – Constructing and Assuring Arguments. PhD Thesis, Department of Computer Science, The University of York (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hawkins, R., Clegg, K., Alexander, R., Kelly, T.: Using a Software Safety Argument Pattern Catalogue: Two Case Studies. In: Flammini, F., Bologna, S., Vittorini, V. (eds.) SAFECOMP 2011. LNCS, vol. 6894, pp. 185–198. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ye, F.: Justifying the Use of COTS Components within Safety Critical Applications. PhD Thesis, Department of Computer Science, The University of York (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wu, W., Kelly, T.: Safety Tactics for Software Architecture Design. In: Proceedings of the 28th Annual International Computer Software and Applications Conference (COMPSAC 2004), vol. 1, pp. 368–375. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC (2004)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Armoush, A.: Design Patterns for Safety-Critical Embedded Systems. Ph.D. Thesis, RWTH-Aachen (2010)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Voss, S., Schätz, B.: Deployment and Scheduling Synthesis for Mixed-Critical Shared-Memory Applications. In: Proceedings of the 20th Annual IEEE International Conference and Workshops on the Engineering of Computer Based Systems, ECBS (2013)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kelly, T.: Arguing Safety – A Systematic Approach to Managing Safety Cases. PhD Thesis, Department of Computer Science, The University of York (1998)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Khalil, M., Schätz, B., Voss, S.: A Pattern-based Approach towards Modular Safety Analysis and Argumentation. In: Embedded Real Time Software and Systems Conference (ERTS 2014), Toulouse, France (2014)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gamma, E., Helm, R., Johnson, R., Vlissides, J.: Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software. Addison Wesley (1995)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    SPES2020 Consortium. Pohl, K., Hönninger, H., Achatz, R., Broy, M.: Model-Based Engineering of Embedded Systems – The SPES 2020 Methodology. Springer (2012)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mili, H., El-Boussaidi, G.: Representing and applying design patterns: what is the problem? In: Briand, L.C., Williams, C. (eds.) MoDELS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3713, pp. 186–200. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Verhulst, E.: OPENCOSS Project Presentation. “Cross-domain systems and safety engineering: Is it feasible?”. Flanders Drive Seminar, Brussels (2013)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Nair, S., de la Vara, J.L., Sabetzadeh, M., Briand, L.: Classification, Structuring, and Assessment of Evidence for Safety: A Systematic Literature Review. In: 6th IEEE International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation, ICST 2013 (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maged Khalil
    • 1
  • Alejandro Prieto
    • 1
  • Florian Hölzl
    • 1
  1. 1.Software and Systems Engineering Dept.Fortiss GmbHMunichGermany

Personalised recommendations