Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Supporting the Validation of Adequacy in Requirements-Based Hazard Mitigations

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality (REFSQ 2015)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 9013))

Abstract

[Context and motivation] In practice, validating functional safety requirements is mainly done by means of reviews, which require large amounts of contextual information about hazards, such as safety goals or the operational conditions under which the hazard occurs. [Question/problem] This information is often scattered across a plethora of artifacts produced particularly during requirements engineering and safety assessment. In consequence, there is a risk that not all relevant information is considered during reviews, leading to subjective and misjudged results. [Principal ideas/results] In order to improve the consideration of all relevant information necessary to validate functional safety requirements, we propose a diagrammatic representation integrating all relevant contextual information. [Contribution] We hypothesize that reviewers are more likely to base their judgment on the relevant contextual information about the hazard, which increases objectivity and confidence in review results. To support this hypothesis, we report preliminary results of an empirical study.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
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.

References

  1. Leveson, L.: Safeware: System Safety and Computers. Addison-Wesley, Boston (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Firesmith, D.: Engineering Safety Requirements, Safety Constraints, and Safety-Critical Requirements. J. Obj. Tech. 3, 27–42 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Leveson, L.: Engineering a Safer World. MIT Press, Boston (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Allenby, K., Kelly, T.: Deriving safety requirements using scenarios. In: Proc. 5th Int. Symp. Requirements Eng., pp. 228–235 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Ericson II, C.: Hazard Analysis Techniques for System Safety. Wiley, New York (2005)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  6. ARP4761: Guidelines and Methods for Conducting the Safety Assessment Process on Civil Airborne Systems and Equipment. SAE International (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  7. ISO26262: Road Vehicles - Functional Safety. International Organization for Standardization (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bishop, P., Bloomfield, R., Guerra, S: The future of goal-based assurance cases. In: Proc. Workshop on Assurance Cases, pp. 390–395 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Whyte,D.: Moving the goalposts: the deregulation of safety in the post-piper alpha offshore oil industry. In: Proc. 47th Ann. Conf. Political Studies Assoc. of the UK (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Hatcliff, J., Wayssyng, A., Kelly, T., Comar, C., Jones, P.: Certifiably safe software-dependent systems: challenges and directions. In: Proc. Future Softw. Eng., pp. 182–200 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Boehm, B.: Verifying and Validating Software Requirements and Design Specifications. IEEE Softw. 1, 75–88 (1984)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Glinz, M.: Improving the quality of requirements with scenarios. In: Proc 2nd World Cong. Softw. Qual., pp. 55–60 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  13. ISO/IEC 25010: Systems and software Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE) – System and software quality models. International Organization for Standardization (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Boehm, B.: Software Engineering Economics. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1981)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Glinz, M., Fricker, S.: On Shared Understanding in Software Enigneering. Computer Sci. Res. Dev. doi:10.1007/s00450-014-0256-x

  16. Gacitua, R., Ma, L., Nuseibeh, B., Piwek, P., de Roeck, A., Rouncefield, M., Sawyer, P., Willis, A., Yang, H.: Making tacit requirements explicit. In: Proc. 2nd Int. Workshop on Manag. Req. Knowl., pp. 85–88 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Lisagor, I., Sun, L., Kelly, T.: The illusion of method: challenges of model-based safety assessment. In: Proc. 28th Int. Syst. Safety Conf. (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Sun, K.: Establishing Confidence in Safety Assessment Evidence. Dissertation, Univ. of York (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Flynn, D., Warhurst, R.: An Empirical Study of the Validation Process within Requirements Determination. Inf. Syst. J. 4, 185–212 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Davies, I., Green, P., Rosemann, M., Idulska, M., Gallo, S.: How do Practitioners use Conceptual Modeling in Practice? Data & Knowl. Eng. 58, 358–380 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. US FAA: Introduction to TCAS II, Version 7.1. (2011). http://goo.gl/EPCYzI

  22. Glinz, M.: On non-functional requirements. In: Proc. IEEE Int. Requirements Eng. Conf., pp. 21–26 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Chung, L., Nixon, B., Yu, E., Mylopoulos, J.: Non-functional Requirements in Software Engineering. Kluwer, Boston (2000)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Sikora, E., Tenbergen, B., Pohl, K.: Industry Needs and Research Directions in Requirements Engineering for Embedded Systems. Requirements Eng. 17, 57–78 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Störrle, H.: Semantics of UML 2.0 activities. In: Proc. IEEE Symp. Visual Lang. and Human-Centric Computing, pp.235–242 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Wohlin, C., Runeson, P., Höchst, M., Ohlson, M., Regnell, B., Wesslén, A.: Experimentation in Software Engineering – An Introduction. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  27. Venkatesh, V., Bala, H.: Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions. Decision Sci. 39, 273–315 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Goodhue, D.: Development and Measurement Validity of a Task-Technology Fit Instrument for User Evaluations or Information Systems. Decision Sci. 29, 105–138 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Denger, C.: SafeSpection — A Framework for Systematization and Customization of Software Hazard Identification by Applying Inspection Concepts. Dissertation, TU Kaiserslautern (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Fagan, M.: Design and Code Inspections to Reduce Errors in Program Development. IBM Syst. J. 3, 182–211 (1976)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Shull, F., Rus, I., Basili, V.: How Perspective-Based Reading Can Improve Requirements Inspections. IEEE Computer 33, 73–79 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Li Q, Boehm B, Yang Y, Wang Q: A value-based review process for prioritizing artifacts. In: Proc. Int. Conf. Softw. Syst. Process, pp. 13–23 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Bitsch, F.: Safety patterns - the key to formal specification of safety requirements. In: Voges, U. (ed.) SAFECOMP 2001. LNCS, vol. 2187, pp. 176–189. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  34. Heitmeyer, C., Kirby Jr., J., Labaw, B., Archer, M., Bharadwaj, R.: Using Abstraction and Model Checking to Detect Safety Violations in Requirements Specifications. IEEE TSE 24, 927–948 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Zafar, S., Dromey, R.: Integrating safety and security requirements into design of an embedded system. In: Proc. 12th Asia-Pacific Soft. Eng. Conf., pp. 1530–1362 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Sindre, G.: A look at misuse cases for safety concerns. In: Ralyté, J., Brinkkemper, J., Henderson-Sellers, B. (eds.) Situational Method Engineering: Fundamentals and Experiences. IFIP, vol. 244, pp. 252–266. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  37. Katta, V., Raspotnig, C., Karpati, P., Stålhane, T.: Requirements management in a combined process for safety and security assessments. In: Proc. Intl. Conf. on Availability, Rel., and Security, pp. 780–786 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Raspotnig, C., Opdahl, A.: Comparing Risk Identification Techniques for Safety and Security Requirements. J. Sys. Softw. 86, 1124–1151 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. van Lamsweerde, A.: Requirements Engineering: From System Goals to UML Models to Software Specifications. Wiley, New York (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Letier, E., van Lamsweerde,A.: Deriving operational software specifications from system goals. In: Proc. Future of Softw. Eng., pp. 119–128 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  41. Belli, F., Hollmann, A., Nissanke, N.: Modeling, analysis and testing of safety issues - an event-based approach and case study. In: Saglietti, F., Oster, N. (eds.) SAFECOMP 2007. LNCS, vol. 4680, pp. 276–282. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  42. Chen, Z., Motet, G: Formalizing safety requirements using controlling automata. In: Proc. 2nd Int. Conf. Depend., pp. 81–86 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Guillerm, R., Sadou, N., Demmou,H.: Combining FMECA and fault trees for declining safety requirements of complex systems. In: Proc. Ann. Europ. Safety and Rel. Conf., pp. 1287–1293 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Hansen, K., Ravn, A., Stavridou, V.: From Safety Analysis to Software Requirements. IEEE TSE 24, 573–584 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. paluno – The Ruhr Institute for Software Technology, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany

    Bastian Tenbergen, Thorsten Weyer & Klaus Pohl

Authors
  1. Bastian Tenbergen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Thorsten Weyer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Klaus Pohl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bastian Tenbergen .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Software Engineering Research Laboratory, Blekinge Institute of Technology, Karlskrona, Sweden

    Samuel A. Fricker

  2. Software Engineering Group, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Hannover, Germany

    Kurt Schneider

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Tenbergen, B., Weyer, T., Pohl, K. (2015). Supporting the Validation of Adequacy in Requirements-Based Hazard Mitigations. In: Fricker, S., Schneider, K. (eds) Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality. REFSQ 2015. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9013. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16101-3_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16101-3_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-16100-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-16101-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation