Advertisement

A Modeling Approach to Support Safety Assurance in the Automotive Domain

  • Yaping Luo
  • Mark van den Brand
  • Luc Engelen
  • Martijn Klabbers
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 366)

Abstract

As safety standards are widely used in safety-critical domains, such as ISO 26262 in the automotive domain, the use of safety cases to demonstrate product safety is stimulated. It is crucial to ensure that a safety case is both correct and clear. To support this, we proposed to make use of modeling techniques to support safety assurance in the automotive domain. Continuing on our previous work, a rule-based approach enables us to extract a conceptual model from safety standards or project guidelines. Then, by applying structured English using an SBVR vocabulary, the safety case is linked to the conceptual model, and the content of it is enforced to be well structured and controlled. The contribution of the explicit link between the safety case and the conceptual model is to reduce the ambiguity of natural language, and to increase the confidence in the claimed safety assurance. Finally, tooling is developed that enables syntax highlighting and content assistance while editing safety cases.

Keywords

Safety Assurance Safety-Critical Systems Conceptual Modeling Safety Argumentation Safety Case 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The research leading to these results has received funding from the FP7 programme under grant agreement no 289011 (OPENCOSS).

References

  1. 1.
    ISO 26262: “Road Vehicles – Functional Safety” (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Meta Modeling Approach to Safety Standard for Consumer Devices (2013), http://www.omg.org/news/meetings/tc/agendas/ut/SysA_Slides/taguchi.pdf
  3. 3.
    Safety Case Repository (2013), http://dependability.cs.virginia.edu/info/Safety Cases:Repository
  4. 4.
    Afreen, H., Bajwa, I., Bordbar, B.: SBVR2UML: A Challenging Transformation. In: Frontiers of Information Technology (FIT), 2011. pp. 33–38 (2011)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bajwa, I.S., G. Lee, M., Bordbar, B.: SBVR Business Rules Generation from Natural Language Specification. In: AAAI 2011 Spring Symposium - AI for Business Agility. pp. 2–8. San Francisco, USA (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cabot, J., Pau, R., Raventós, R.: From UML/OCL to {SBVR} specifications: A challenging transformation. Information Systems 35(4), 417–440 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ceponiene, L., Nemuraite, L., Vedrickas, G.: Semantic Business Rules in Service Oriented Development of Information Systems. In: 15th International Conference on Information and Software Technologies, IT. pp. 404–416 (2009)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lewis, R.: Safety Case Development as an Information Modelling Problem. In: Dale, C., Anderson, T. (eds.) Safety-Critical Systems: Problems, Process and Practice, pp. 183–193. Springer London (2009)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Luo, Y., Van den Brand, M., Engelen, L., M. Favaro, J., Klabbers, M., Sartori, G.: Extracting models from iso 26262 for reusable safety assurance. In: Safe and Secure Software Reuse - 13th International Conference on Software Reuse. vol. 7925, pp. 192–207. Springer Berlin Heidelberg (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nemuraite, L., Skersys, T., Sukys, A., Sinkevicius, E., Ablonskis, L.: VETIS tool for editing and transforming SBVR business vocabularies and business rules into UML&OCL models. In: 16th International Conference on Information and Software Technologies, Kaunas: Kaunas University of Technology. pp. 377–384 (2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Njonko, P., El Abed, W.: From Natural Language Business Requirements to Executable Models via SBVR. In: Systems and Informatics (ICSAI), 2012 International Conference on. pp. 2453–2457 (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    OMG: SBVR: Semantics Of Business Vocabulary And Rules (Sepetember 2013), http://www.omg.org/spec/SBVR/1.1
  13. 13.
    Spreeuwenberg, S., Healy, K.A.: SBVR’s Approach to Controlled Natural Language. In: Proceedings of the 2009 conference on Controlled natural language. pp. 155–169. CNL’09, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg (2010)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    T.Kelly: Arguing Safety - A Systematic Approach to Managing Safety Cases. Ph.D. thesis, University Of York (1998)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wilson, S., Kelly, T., McDermid, J.: Safety Case Development: Current Practice, Future Prospects. In: Shaw, R. (ed.) Safety and Reliability of Software Based Systems, pp. 135–156. Springer London (1997)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yaping Luo
    • 1
  • Mark van den Brand
    • 1
  • Luc Engelen
    • 1
  • Martijn Klabbers
    • 1
  1. 1.Eindhoven University of TechnologyEindhovenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations