Abstract
Software reliability assessment is ‘different’ from traditional reliability techniques and requires a different process. The use of development standards is common in current good practice. Software safety standards recommend processes to design and assure the integrity of safety-related software. However the reasoning on the validity of these processes is complex and opaque. In this paper an attempt is made to use Graphical Probability Models (GPMs) to formalise the reasoning that underpins the construction of a Safety Integrity Level (SIL) claim based upon a safety standard such as IEC61508 Part 3. There are three major benefits: the reasoning becomes compact and easy to comprehend, facilitating its scrutiny, and making it easier for experts to develop a consensus using a common formal framework; the task of the regulator is supported because to some degree the subjective reasoning which underpins the expert consensus on compliance is captured in the structure of the GPM; the users will benefit from software tools that support implementation of IEC61508, such tools even have the potential to allow cost-benefit analysis of alternative safety assurance techniques.
This report and the work it describes were funded by the Health and Safety Executive. The opinions or conclusions expressed are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily represent the views of the Health and Safety Executive.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Bishop P G and Bloomfield R E (1996). A conservative theory for long term reliability growth prediction. The Seventh International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering (ISSRE’ 96), pp 308.
Black W S (2000). IEC 61508 — What doesn’t tell you. Computing and Control Engineering Journal, February 2000.
Brown S (2000). Overview of IEC61508-design of electric/electronic/programmable electronic safety related systems. Computing and Control Engineering Journal, February 2000.
Fenton N E and Neil M (2005a). Improved Software Defect Prediction. Tenth Annual European SEPG, London 13–16 June 2005.
Fenton N E, Neil M, Marsh W, Krause P and Mishra R (2005b). Predicting Software Defects in Varying Development Lifecycles using Bayesian Nets, submitted to ESEC 2005.
Fenton N E and Neil M (2004). Combining evidence in risk analysis using Bayesian Networks. Safety Critical Systems Club Newsletter 13(4) September 2004.
Fenton N E, Krause P and Neil M (2002). Software Measurement: Uncertainty and Causal Modelling. IEEE Software 10(4), 116–122, 2002.
Fenton N E, Krause P and Neil M (2001a). Probabilistic Modelling for Software Quality Control. Sixth European Conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty September 19–21, Toulouse, France, 2001.
Fenton N E and Neil M (2001b). Making Decisions: Using Bayesian Nets and MCDA. Knowledge-Based Systems vol. 14, pp. 307–325, 2001.
Neil M, Fenton N E, Forey S and Harris R (2001c). Using Bayesian Belief networks to predict the reliability of military vehicles. Computing and Control Engineering Journal. February 2001, vol. 12 issue 1, pp 11–20.
Fenton N E and Ohlsson N (2000). Quantitative Analysis of Faults and Failures in a Complex Software System. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 26(8), 797–814, 2000.
Fenton N E and Neil M (1999). A Critique of Software Defect Prediction Models’, 25(5) IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 675–689, 1999.
Gran B A (2002). Assessment of programmable systems using Bayesian Belief nets. Safety Science 40 pp 797–812. 2002.
Hall P, May J, Nichol D, Csachur K and Kinch B (1992). Integrity Prediction during Software Development. Safety of Computer Control Systems. (SAFECOMP’92), Computer Systems in Safety-Critical Applications, Proceedings of the IFAC Symposium, Zurich, Switzerland, 28–30 Oct 1992, 1992.
IEC61508 (1998–2000). IEC61508 functional safety of electrical/ electronic/programmable electronic safety-related systems parts 1–7. 1998-2000. Published by the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), Geneva, Switzerland.
McDermid J and Pumfrey D J (2001). Software safety: Why is there no Consensus?. Proceedings of the 19th International System Safety Conference, Huntsville, AL, System Safety Society, P.O. Box 70, Unionville, VA 22567-0070
Pearl J (1998). Probabilistic reasoning in intelligent systems. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo 1988 (revised 1997) 0934613737.
Weaver R A, McDermid J A and Kelly T P (2002). Software Safety Arguments-Towards a Systematic Categorisation of Evidence. Twentieth International System Safety Conference, Denver, Colorado, USA, August 2002.
Weaver R A, Despotou G, Kelly T P, McDermind J A (2005). Combining Software Evidence — Arguments and Assurance. Twenty seventh International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE): Workshop on Realising Evidence-based Software Engineering. St. Louis Missouri, USA, May 2005.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2006 Springer-Verlag London Limited
About this paper
Cite this paper
Brito, M., May, J., Gallardo, J., Fergus, E. (2006). Use of Graphical Probabilistic Models to build SIL claims based on software safety standards such as IEC61508-3. In: Redmill, F., Anderson, T. (eds) Developments in Risk-based Approaches to Safety. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-84628-447-3_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/1-84628-447-3_14
Publisher Name: Springer, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-84628-333-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-84628-447-2
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)