iBet uBet web content aggregator. Adding the entire web to your favor.
iBet uBet web content aggregator. Adding the entire web to your favor.



Link to original content: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10557-4_42
Rethinking of Strategy for Safety Argument Development | SpringerLink
Skip to main content

Rethinking of Strategy for Safety Argument Development

  • Conference paper
Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security (SAFECOMP 2014)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 8696))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 1870 Accesses

Abstract

A ‘strategy’ in Goal Structuring Notation (GSN) aims to help safety-case developers and reviewers to understand the inferences in a hierarchy of safety claims. However, the identification and elaboration of ‘strategies’ in argument development is not always straightforward in practice. In this paper, we revisit the role of strategies in the development of safety cases and examine the application of strategies in some existing argument structures. Four main sources of information are identified as the basis of strategy formulation. A list of generic strategy types for argument decomposition and refinement are analysed in order to facilitate the safety case development and review processes for assuring system safety.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Evidence: Using safety cases in industry and healthcare. The Health Foundation, London (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  2. GSN Working Group, GSN Community Standard Version 1, Origin Consulting (York) Limited (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Kelly, T.P.: Arguing Safety: A Systematic Approach to Managing Safety Cases. PhD Thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of York, UK (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Hawkins, R., Kelly, T.: A Software Safety Argument Pattern Catalogue. The University of York, York (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  5. OMG, Structured Assurance Case Metamodel (SACM), Version 1.0. (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Yamamoto, S., Matsuno, Y.: An evaluation of argument patterns to reduce pitfalls of applying assurance case. In: 2013 1st International Workshop on Assurance Cases for Software-Intensive Systems, ASSURE (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bloomfield, R., Bishop, P.: Safety and Assurance Cases: Past, Present and Possible Future – an Adelard Perspective. In: Dale, C., Anderson, T. (eds.) Making Systems Safer, pp. 51–67. Springer, London (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Toulmin, S.E.: The Uses of Argument. University Press, Cambridge (1958)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Spriggs, J.: GSN - The Goal Structuring Notation (A Structured Approach to Presenting Arguments). Springer (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bloomfield, R., et al.: ASCAD–Adelard safety case development manual. Adelard (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Yuan, T., Kelly, T.: Argument Schemes in Computer System Safety Engineering. Informal Logic 31(2), 89–109 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Denney, E., Pai, G., Pohl, J.: Automating the Generation of Heterogeneous Aviation Safety Cases. Technical Report NASA/CR-2011-215983, NASA Ames Research Center (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kelly, T.: A Six-Step Method for the Development of Goal Structures. York Software Engineering, Flixborough (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Chen, Y., Lawford, M., Wang, H., Wassyng, A.: Insulin Pump Software Certification. In: Gibbons, J., MacCaull, W. (eds.) FHIES 2013. LNCS, vol. 8315, pp. 87–106. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. MOD, Defence Standard 00-56 Safety Management Requirements for Defence Systems, Part 1: Requirements, Issue 4 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Hawkins, R., et al.: A New Approach to creating Clear Safety Arguments. In: Dale, C., Anderson, T. (eds.) Advances in Systems Safety, pp. 3–23. Springer, London (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Weinstock, C.B., Goodenough, J.B.: CMU/SEI-2009-TN-018 Towards an Assurance Case Practice for Medical Devices, Carnegie Mellon University (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Dodd, I., Habli, I.: Safety certification of airborne software: An empirical study. Reliability Engineering & System Safety 98(1), 7–23 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Holloway, C.M.: Towards understanding the DO-178C / ED-12C assurance case. In: System Safety, incorporating the Cyber Security Conference 2012 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Hawkins, R., Habli, I., Kelly, T.: The Principles of Software Safety Assurance. In: The 31st International System Safety Conference, Boston, Massachusetts, USA (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Birch, J., et al.: Safety Cases and Their Role in ISO 26262 Functional Safety Assessment. In: Bitsch, F., Guiochet, J., Kaâniche, M. (eds.) SAFECOMP. LNCS, vol. 8153, pp. 154–165. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. Govier, T.: A practical study of argument. Cengage Learning, Wadsworth (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Dowden, B.H.: Logical Reasoning (2012), http://www.csus.edu/indiv/d/dowdenb/4/Logical%20Reasoning.pdf (accessed March 1, 2014)

  24. Walton, D.N., Reed, C., Macagno, F.: Argumentation schemes. Cambridge University Press (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Sun, L.: Establishing Confidence in Safety Assessment Evidence. PhD Thesis, Department of Computer Science. University of York, UK (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Goodenough, J.B., Weinstock, C.B., Klein, A.Z.: Eliminative induction: A basis for arguing system confidence. In: 2013 35th International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Post-Closure Safety Case for Geological Repositories - Nature and Purpose. Nuclear Energy Agency, OECD (2004)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Sun, L., Silva, N., Kelly, T. (2014). Rethinking of Strategy for Safety Argument Development. In: Bondavalli, A., Ceccarelli, A., Ortmeier, F. (eds) Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security. SAFECOMP 2014. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8696. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10557-4_42

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10557-4_42

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-10556-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-10557-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics