Abstract
Safety case development is highly recommended by some safety standards to justify the safety of a system. The Goal Structuring Notation (GSN) is a popular approach to construct a safety case. However, the content of the safety case elements, such as safety claims, is in natural language. Therefore, a common understanding of the meaning of a safety claim may be difficult to reach. Consequently, the confidence of a safety claim can be misplaced. In this paper, we propose to use an SBVR-based controlled language to support safety case development. By using the controlled language, the ambiguities caused by natural language can be mitigated. Furthermore, an SBVR editor for building a vocabulary and a GSN editor with vocabulary support are developed. Finally, a case study has been carried out to show the benefits of using the controlled language for safety case construction.
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
EUR Whole Airspace ATM System Safety Case (2001). http://dependability.cs.virginia.edu/research/safetycases/EUR_WholeAirspace.pdf
Tube Lines Contractual Safety Case (2004). http://dependability.cs.virginia.edu/research/safetycases/Tube_Lines.pdf
GSN Community Standard Version 1 (2011). http://www.goalstructuringnotation.info/documents/GSN_Standard.pdf
Software Consideration in Airborne Systems and Equipment Certification: RTCA DO-178C, December 2011
Barry, M.R.: CertWare: a workbench for safety case production and analysis (2011)
Bishop, P., Bloomfield, R.: A methdology for safety case development. In: Redmill, F., Anderson, T. (eds.) Industrial Perspectives of Safety-Critical Systems, pp. 194–203. Springer, London (1998)
Cabot, J., Pau, R., Raventós, R.: From UML/OCL to SBVR specifications: a challenging transformation. Inf. Syst. 35(4), 417–440 (2010)
De Tommasi, M., Corallo, A.: SBEAVER: a tool for modeling business vocabularies and business rules. In: Gabrys, B., Howlett, R.J., Jain, L.C. (eds.) KES 2006. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4253, pp. 1083–1091. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Denney, E., Pai, G., Pohl, J.: AdvoCATE: an assurance case automation toolset. In: Ortmeier, F., Daniel, P. (eds.) SAFECOMP Workshops 2012. LNCS, vol. 7613, pp. 8–21. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
EUROCONTROL: Safety Case Development Manual (2006). http://www.eurocontrol.int/sites/default/files/article/content/documents/nm/link2000/safety-case-development-manual-v2.2-ri-13nov06.pdf
Graydon, P.J.: Towards a clearer understanding of context and its role in assurance argument confidence. In: Bondavalli, A., Di Giandomenico, F. (eds.) SAFECOMP 2014. LNCS, vol. 8666, pp. 139–154. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)
Hawkins, R., Kelly, T., Knight, J., Graydon, P.: A new approach to creating clear safety arguments. In: Dale, A., Anderson, T. (eds.) Advances in Systems Safety, pp. 3–23. Springer, London (2011)
ISO: ISO 26262: “Road Vehicles - Functional Safety” (2011)
Kelly, T.: Arguing Safety - A Systematic Approach to Managing Safety Cases. Ph.D. thesis, University Of York (1998)
Kelly, T., Weaver, R.: The goal structuring notation - a safety argument notation. In: Proceedings of Dependable Systems and Networks 2004 Workshop on Assurance Cases (2004)
Kolovos, D.S., Paige, R.F., Polack, F.A.C.: The epsilon transformation language. In: Vallecillo, A., Gray, J., Pierantonio, A. (eds.) ICMT 2008. LNCS, vol. 5063, pp. 46–60. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
Luo, Y., van den Brand, M., Engelen, L., Klabbers, M.: From conceptual models to safety assurance. In: Yu, E., Dobbie, G., Jarke, M., Purao, S. (eds.) ER 2014. LNCS, vol. 8824, pp. 195–208. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)
Luo, Y., van den Brand, M., Engelen, L., Klabbers, M.: A modeling approach to support safety assurance in the automotive domain. In: Selvaraj, H., Zydek, D., Chmaj, G. (eds.) Progress in Systems Engineering. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol. 330, pp. 339–345. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland (2015)
Luo, Y., van den Brand, M., Engelen, L., Favaro, J., Klabbers, M., Sartori, G.: Extracting models from ISO 26262 for reusable safety assurance. In: Favaro, J., Morisio, M. (eds.) ICSR 2013. LNCS, vol. 7925, pp. 192–207. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)
Matsuno, Y.: D-Case Editor: A Typed Assurance Case Editor. University of Tokyo (2011)
Defence Standard 00-55 Part 1 (1997). http://www.software-supportability.org/Docs/00-55_Part_1.pdf
Nemuraite, L., Skersys, T., Sukys, A., Sinkevicius, E., Ablonskis, L.: VeTIS Tool for Editing and Transforming SBVR Business Vocabularies and Business Rules into UML & OCL Models (2010)
OMG: SBVR: Semantics Of Business Vocabulary And Rules (version 1.2), Sepetember 2013
Safety Case Repository (2013). http://dependability.cs.virginia.edu/info/Safety_Cases:Repository
Spreeuwenberg, S., Healy, K.A.: SBVR’s approach to controlled natural language. In: Fuchs, N.E. (ed.) CNL 2009. LNCS, vol. 5972, pp. 155–169. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)
Taguchi, K.: Meta Modeling Approach to Safety Standard for Consumer Devices (2013)
Acknowledgements
The research leading to these results has received funding from the FP7 programme under grant agreement n\(^\text {o}\) 289011 (OPENCOSS).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Luo, Y., van den Brand, M., Kiburse, A. (2015). Safety Case Development with SBVR-Based Controlled Language. In: Desfray, P., Filipe, J., Hammoudi, S., Pires, L. (eds) Model-Driven Engineering and Software Development. MODELSWARD 2015. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 580. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27869-8_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27869-8_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-27868-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-27869-8
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)