Abstract
Highly automated driving functions pose challenges for the safety assurance due to their high complexity and the dynamic environment in which they operate. UL 4600, the safety standard for autonomous products, mandates the use of Safety Performance Indicators (SPIs) to continuously ensure the validity of safety cases by monitoring and taking action when violations are identified. Despite numerous examples of concrete SPIs available in the standard and companion literature, their contribution rationale for achieving safety is often left implicit. In this paper, we present our initial work towards an argument pattern for the use of SPIs to ensure validity of safety cases throughout the entire lifecycle of the system. Our aim is to make the implicit argument behind using SPIs explicit, and based on this, to analyze the situations that can undermine confidence in the chosen set of SPIs. To maintain the confidence in SPIs’ effectiveness, we propose an approach to continuously monitor their expected performance by using meta-SPIs.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ul4600: Standard for evaluation of autonomous products (2023)
(ACWG), T.A.C.W.G.: Goal Structuring Notation community standard - version 3. Tech. rep. (2021)
Denney, E., Pai, G., Habli, I.: Dynamic safety cases for through-life safety assurance. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 587–590 (2015)
Fayollas, C., Bonnin, H., Flebus, O.: SafeOps: a concept of continuous safety. In: 2020 16th European Dependable Computing Conference (EDCC), pp. 65–68 (2020)
Gyllenhammar, M., Bergenhem, C., Warg, F.: ADS safety assurance - future directions. In: CARS: 6th International Workshop on Critical Automotive Applications: Robustness & Safety (2021)
Hawkins, R.D., Ryan Conmy, P.M.: Identifying run-time monitoring requirements for autonomous systems through the analysis of safety arguments. In: International Conference on Computer Safety, Reliability and Security (SAFECOMP), pp. 11–24 (2023)
Johanssonn, R., Koopman, P.: Continuous learning approach for safety engineering. In: CARS: 7th International Workshop on Critical Automotive Applications: Robustness & Safety (2022)
Koopman, P.: How Safe is Safe Enough?: Measuring and Predicting Autonomous Vehicle Safety. Amazon Digital Services LLC (2022)
Koopman, P.: Ul 4600: What to include in an autonomous vehicle safety case. Computer 56(05), 101–104 (may 2023)
McDermid, J.A., Jia, Y., Habli, I.: Towards a framework for safety assurance of autonomous systems. In: Artificial Intelligence Safety, pp. 1–7. CEUR Workshops (2019)
Wagner, M., Carlan, C.: The open autonomy safety case framework. Saf. Crit. Syst. eJournal 3(1)(2024)
Weyns, D., et al.: Perpetual assurances for self-adaptive systems. In: Software Engineering for Self-Adaptive Systems III. Assurances. Springer (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36249-1
Acknowledgment
This work was partially supported by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research in the project MANNHEIM-AutoDevSafeOps (011S22087R).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Ratiu, D., Rohlinger, T., Stolte, T., Wagner, S. (2024). Towards an Argument Pattern for the Use of Safety Performance Indicators. In: Ceccarelli, A., Trapp, M., Bondavalli, A., Schoitsch, E., Gallina, B., Bitsch, F. (eds) Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security. SAFECOMP 2024 Workshops. SAFECOMP 2024. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 14989. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-68738-9_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-68738-9_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-68737-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-68738-9
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)