Use of Quality Metrics for Functional Safety in Systems of Cooperative Vehicles

  • Kenneth Östberg
  • Rolf Johansson
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7613)


Looking at functional safety of vehicles, we have seen an evolution from federated to integrated E/E architectures. When extending the way of specifying and analysing functional safety to also address cooperative functionality, it is not possible to keep a static view of the boundaries of the system for which to ensure safety. This is because the set of vehicles realizing a cooperative function may change a lot during the execution of the cooperative function. In this work in progress paper we suggest to move part of the task to show safety, from design time to run time. This implies that it will become necessary to monitor the system at run time, continuously calculate its quality and share that information between the individual vehicles to assert that the system is safe. In order to accomplish this, appropriate metrics are needed, both during design time and run time. Inspired by information theory, this paper sketches some common properties for metrics, and indicates how that can be beneficial.


Safety Redundancy Quality Software metrics 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Bate, I., et al.: A Contract-Based Approach to Designing Safe Systems. In: 8th Australian Workshop on Safety-Critical Systems and Software, SCS 2003 (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chen, D., Johansson, R., Lönn, H., Papadopoulos, Y., Sandberg, A., Törner, F., Törngren, M.: Modelling Support for Design of Safety-Critical Automotive Embedded Systems. In: Harrison, M.D., Sujan, M.-A. (eds.) SAFECOMP 2008. LNCS, vol. 5219, pp. 72–85. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Johansson, R., et al.: A Road-Map for Enabling System Analysis of AUTOSAR Based Systems. In: Proceedings of Critical Automotive applications: Robustness & Safety, CARS (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Meyer, B.: Object-Oriented software Construction. Prentice Hall (1988)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Di Natale, M., Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, A.L.: Moving From federated to Integrated Architechtures in Automotive: The Role of Standards, Methods and Tools. Proceedings of the IEEE 98, 603–620 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kaiser, J., Zug, S.: A fault-aware sensor architecture for cooperative mobile applications. In: Proc. 17th IEEE Workshop on Dependable Parallel, Distributed and Network-Centric Systems (DPDNS 2012), Shanghai, China, May 25 (2012)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kenneth Östberg
    • 1
  • Rolf Johansson
    • 1
  1. 1.SP Technical Research Institute of SwedenBoråsSweden

Personalised recommendations