Advertisement

A Runtime Safety Monitoring Approach for Adaptable Autonomous Systems

  • Nikita Bhardwaj HauptEmail author
  • Peter Liggesmeyer
Conference paper
  • 685 Downloads
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11699)

Abstract

Adaptable Autonomous Systems are advanced autonomous systems which not only interact with their environment, but are aware of it and are capable of adapting their behavior and structure accordingly. Since these systems operate in an unknown, dynamic and unstructured safety-critical environment, traditional safety assurance techniques are not sufficient anymore. In order to guarantee safe behavior, possibly at all times in all possible situations, they require methodologies that can observe the system status at runtime and ensure safety accordingly. To this end, we introduce a runtime safety monitoring approach that uses a rule-based safety monitor to observe the system for safety-critical deviations. The approach behaves like a fault tolerance mechanism where, the system continuously monitors itself and activates corrective measures in the event of safety-critical failures, thereby aiding the system to sustain a safe behavior at runtime. We illustrate the presented approach by employing an example from autonomous agricultural domain and discuss the case study with initial findings.

Keywords

Runtime safety monitoring Adaptable Autonomous Systems Safety monitor Reconfiguration 

References

  1. 1.
    Vassev, E., Hinchey, M.: Adaptation to the unforeseen: can we trust autonomous and adaptive systems? In: 3rd International Conference on Vehicle Technology and Intelligent Transport Systems, pp. 366–372 (2017)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    ISO - ISO 26262 Road vehicles Functional Safety Part 1–10 (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Avizienis, A., Laprie, J.-C., Randell, B., Landwehr, C.: Basic concepts and taxonomy of dependable and secure computing. IEEE Trans. Dependable Secure Comput. 1(1), 11–33 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Koopman, P.: Challenges in representing CPS safety. In: Developing Dependable and Secure Automotive Cyber-Physical Systems from Components, March 2011. http://users.ece.cmu.edu/~koopman/pubs/koopman11_cps_safety.pdf
  5. 5.
    Hoyningen-Huene, M., Baldinger, M.: Tractor-implement-automation and its application to a tractor-loader wagon combination. In: Machine Control & Guidance, pp. 171–185 (2010)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    ISO 25119: Tractors and machinery for agriculture and forestry - Safety-related parts of control systemsGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Barreiro, P., et al.: Safety functional requirements for “robot fleets for highly effective agriculture and forestry management”. In: 1st International Workshop on Robotics and Associated High Technologies and Equipment for Agriculture (RHEA-2011) (2011). http://www.rhea-project.eu
  8. 8.
    Bhardwaj, N., Liggesmeyer, P.: A conceptual framework for safe reconfiguration in open system of systems. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Software Engineering for Systems-of-Systems, SESoS 2018, pp. 17–20 (2018)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Watanabe, K., Kang, E., Lin, C-W., Shiraishi, S.: Runtime monitoring for safety of intelligent vehicles. In: Proceedings of the 55th Annual Design Automation Conference on - DAC 2018, pp. 1–6 (2018)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Adam, S., Larsen, M., Jensen, K., Schultz, U.P.: Towards rule-based dynamic safety monitoring for mobile robots. In: Brugali, D., Broenink, J.F., Kroeger, T., MacDonald, B.A. (eds.) SIMPAR 2014. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 8810, pp. 207–218. Springer, Cham (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11900-7_18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Klein, P.: The safety-bag expert system in the electronic railway interlocking system Elektra. Expert Syst. Appl. 3(4), 499–506 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Functional Safety of Electrical/Electronic/Programmable Electronic Safety-Related Systems-Part 7: Overview of Techniques and Measures, IEC 61508, 153 (2010)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Haddadin, S., Suppa, M., Bodenmüller, T., Albu-Schäeffer, A., Hirzinger, G.: Towards the robotic co-worker. In: Pradalier, C., Siegwart, R., Hirzinger, G. (eds.) Robotics Research. Springer Tracts in Advanced Robotics, vol. 70, pp. 261–282. Springer, Heidelberg (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-19457-3_16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mason, L., Guiochet, J., Waeselynck, H., Desfosses, A., Laval, M.: Synthesis of safety rules for active monitoring: application to an airport light measurement robot. In: 2017 1st IEEE International Conference on Robotic Computing, pp. 263–270 (2017)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Woodman, R., Winfield, A.F., Harper, C., Fraser, M.: Building safer robots: safety driven control. Int. J. Rob. Res. 31(13), 1603–1626 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rushby, J.: Runtime certification. In: Leucker, M. (ed.) RV 2008. LNCS, vol. 5289, pp. 21–35. Springer, Heidelberg (2008).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89247-2_2CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.TU KaiserslauternKaiserslauternGermany

Personalised recommendations