Multidirectional Modular Conditional Safety Certificates

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9338)


Over the last 20 years, embedded systems have evolved from closed, rather static single-application systems towards open, flexible, multi-application systems of systems. While this is a blessing from an application perspective, it certainly is a curse from a safety engineering perspective as it invalidates the base assumptions of established engineering methodologies. Due to the combinatorial complexity and the amount of uncertainty encountered in the analysis of such systems, we believe that more potent modular safety approaches coupled with adequate runtime checks are required. In this paper, we investigate the possibility of an integrated contract-based approach covering vertical dependencies (between platform and application) and horizontal dependencies (between applications) in order to efficiently assure the safety of the whole system of systems through modularization. We integrate both concepts using state-of-the-art research and showcase the application of the integrated approach based on a small industrial case study.


Safety Assurance Contracts Multi-core Conserts 



The research leading to these results has received funding from the EMC2 – ‘Embedded Multi-Core systems for Mixed Criticality applications in dynamic and changeable real-time environments’ project. This is an ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking project in the Innovation Pilot Programme ‘Computing platforms for embedded systems’ (AIPP5) under grant agreement n°621429.


  1. 1.
    ARINC 653, avionic application software standard interface, part 1 (2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Website of the AUTOSAR standard.
  3. 3.
    D_SP1_R3.3_a_M3 Meta-Model Concepts for RTP V; CESAR ProjectGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fernandes, P., Nunes, U.: Platooning of autonomous vehicles with inter vehicle communications in SUMO Traffic Simulator. In: International IEEE Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC), (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Frescor project: Framework for real-time embedded systems based on COntRACTS 04 May 2015.
  6. 6.
    Hoyningen-Huene, M., Baldinger, M.: Tractor-Implement-Automation and its application to a tractor-loader wagon combination. In: 2nd International Conference on Machine Control & Guidance, University of Bonn, Germany (2010)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    International Organization for Standardization (ISO), ISO 26262 Road vehicles – Functional safety, ISO, November 2011Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kotaba, O., Nowotschy, J., Paulitschy, M., Pettersz, S.M., Theilingx, H.: Multicore in real-time systems – temporal isolation challenges due to shared resources. In: WICERT workshop (2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ruiz, A., Habli, I., Espinoza, H.: Towards a case-based reasoning approach for safety assurance reuse. In: Ortmeier, F., Daniel, P. (eds.) SAFECOMP Workshops 2012. LNCS, vol. 7613, pp. 22–35. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ruiz, A., Espinoza, H., Kelly, T.: Adequacy of contract grammars for component certification. In: SAFECOMP 2013 Fast Abstract. Toulouse, France, September 2013Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schneider, D., Trapp, M.: Conditional safety certificates in open systems. In: Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Critical Automotive Applications: Robustness and Safety (CARS 2010) (2010)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Schneider, D., Trapp, M.: A safety engineering framework for open adaptive systems. In: Proceedings of the Fifth IEEE International Conference on Self-Adaptive and Self-Organizing Systems (SASO) (2011)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schneider, D., Trapp, M.: Conditional Safety Certification of Open Adaptive Systems. ACM Trans. Auton. Adapt. Syst. vol. 8, p. 20, Article 8 (2013)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    D.2.5.4 Contract Specification Language (CSL); SPEEDS Project; Deliverable; Rev. 1.0.1; April 2008Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zimmer, B.: Efficiently deploying safety-critical applications onto open integrated architectures. HRSG, Fraunhofer IESE, Kaiserslautern (2014)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zimmer, B., Bürklen, S., Knoop, M., Höfflinger, J., Trapp, M.: Vertical safety interfaces – improving the efficiency of modular certification. In: Flammini, F., Bologna, S., Vittorini, V. (eds.) SAFECOMP 2011. LNCS, vol. 6894, pp. 29–42. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sljivo, I., Carlson, J., Gallina, B., Hansson, H.: Fostering reuse within safety-critical component-based systems through fine-grained contracts. In: proceedings of the International Workshop on Critical Software Component Reusability and Certification across Domains (CSC 2013), (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Fraunhofer IESEKaiserslauternGermany
  2. 2.ICT-European Software Institute DivisionTECNALIADerioSpain

Personalised recommendations