Abstract
Robots and autonomous systems have become a part of our everyday life, therefore guaranteeing their safety is crucial. Among the possible ways to do so, monitoring is widely used, but few methods exist to systematically generate safety rules to implement such monitors. Particularly, building safety monitors that do not constrain excessively the system’s ability to perform its tasks is necessary as those systems operate with few human interventions. We propose in this paper a method to take into account the system’s desired tasks in the specification of strategies for monitors and apply it to a case study. We show that we allow more strategies to be found and we facilitate the reasoning about the trade-off between safety and availability.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
NuSMV home page. http://nusmv.fbk.eu/. Accessed Nov 2017
Safety Monitoring Framework. LAAS-CNRS Project. https://www.laas.fr/projects/smof. Accessed Dec 2017
Adam, S., Larsen, M., Jensen, K., Schultz, U.P.: Rule-based dynamic safety monitoring for mobile robots. J. Softw. Eng. Robot. 7, 120–141 (2016)
Avizienis, A., Laprie, J.C., Randell, B., Landwehr, C.: Basic concepts and taxonomy of dependable and secure computing. IEEE Trans. Dependable Secur. Comput. 1, 11–33 (2004)
Delgado, N., Gates, A.Q., Roach, S.: A taxonomy and catalog of runtime software-fault monitoring tools. Trans. Softw. Eng. 30, 859–872 (2004)
Falcone, Y., Fernandez, J.-C., Mounier, L.: What can you verify and enforce at runtime? Int. J. Softw. Tools Technol. Transf. 14, 349–382 (2012)
Fox, J., Das, S.: Safe and Sound - Artificial Intelligence in Hazardous Applications. AAAI Press/MIT Press, Palo Alto (2000)
Guiochet, J.: Hazard analysis of human-robot interactions with HAZOP-UML. Saf. Sci. 84, 225–237 (2016)
Haddadin, S., Suppa, M., Fuchs, S., Bodenmüller, T., Albu-Schäffer, A., Hirzinger, G.: Towards the robotic co-worker. In: Pradalier, C., Siegwart, R., Hirzinger, G. (eds.) The 14th International Symposium on Robotics Research (ISRR2011), vol. 70, pp. 261–282. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-19457-3_16
Huang, J., Erdogan, C., Zhang, Y., Moore, B., Luo, Q., Sundaresan, A., Rosu, G.: ROSRV: runtime verification for robots. In: Bonakdarpour, B., Smolka, S.A. (eds.) RV 2014. LNCS, vol. 8734, pp. 247–254. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11164-3_20
Jiang, H., Elbaum, S., Detweiler, C.: Inferring and monitoring invariants in robotic systems. Auton. Robot 41, 1027–1046 (2017)
Leucker, M., Schallhart, C.: A brief account of runtime verification. J. Log. Algebr. Program. 78, 293–303 (2009)
Ligatti, J., Bauer, L., Walker, D.: Edit automata: enforcement mechanisms for run-time security policies. IJIS 4, 2–16 (2005)
Machin, M., Dufossé, F., Blanquart, J.-P., Guiochet, J., Powell, D., Waeselynck, H.: Specifying safety monitors for autonomous systems using model-checking. In: Bondavalli, A., Di Giandomenico, F. (eds.) SAFECOMP 2014. LNCS, vol. 8666, pp. 262–277. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10506-2_18
Machin, M., Guiochet, J., Waeselynck, H., Blanquart, J.-P., Roy, M., Masson, L.: SMOF - a safety monitoring framework for autonomous systems. IEEE Trans. Syst., Man Cybern. PP, 1–14 (2016)
Martinelli, F., Matteucci, I., Morisset, C.: From qualitative to quantitative enforcement of security policy. In: Kotenko, I., Skormin, V. (eds.) MMM-ACNS 2012. LNCS, vol. 7531, pp. 22–35. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33704-8_3
Masson, 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 First IEEE International Conference on Robotic Computing (IRC) (2017)
Pace, C., Seward, D.: A safety integrated architecture for an autonomous safety excavator. In: International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction (2000)
Roderick, S., Roberts, B., Atkins, E., Akin, D.: The ranger robotic satellite servicer and its autonomous software-based safety system. Intell. Syst. 19, 12–19 (2004)
SAPHARI: Safe and Autonomous Physical Human-Aware Robot Interaction. Project supported by the European Commission under the 7th Framework Programme. (2011–2015). www.saphari.eu. Accessed Nov 2017
Woodman, R., Winfield, A.F., Harper, C., Fraser, M.: Building safer robots: safety driven control. Int. J. Robot. Res. 31, 1603–1626 (2012)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this paper
Cite this paper
Masson, L., Guiochet, J., Waeselynck, H., Cabrera, K., Cassel, S., Törngren, M. (2018). Tuning Permissiveness of Active Safety Monitors for Autonomous Systems. In: Dutle, A., Muñoz, C., Narkawicz, A. (eds) NASA Formal Methods. NFM 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10811. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77935-5_23
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77935-5_23
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-77934-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-77935-5
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)