Abstract
Structured arguments are commonly used to communicate to stakeholders that safety, security or other attributes of a system are achieved. Due to the growing complexity of systems, more uncertainties appear and the confidence in arguments tends to be less justifiable by reviewing. In this paper, we propose a quantitative method to assess the confidence in structured arguments, like safety cases. We adopt the Goal Structuring Notation (GSN) to model the safety case and propose to add annotations to identify uncertainties in this model. Three inference types of arguments are proposed according to their impact on confidence. Definition and quantification assessment of confidence are based on the belief function theory. The proposed approach is illustrated with several GSN examples.
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
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ayoub, A., Kim, B.G., Lee, I., Sokolsky, O.: A systematic approach to justifying sufficient confidence in software safety arguments. In: Ortmeier, F., Lipaczewski, M. (eds.) SAFECOMP 2012. LNCS, vol. 7612, pp. 305–316. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
Bishop, P., Bloomfield, R.: A methodology for safety case development. In: Redmill, F., Anderson, T. (eds.) Industrial Perspectives of Safety-Critical Systems, pp. 194–203. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)
Bloomfield, R., Littlewood, B., Wright, D.: Confidence: its role in dependability cases for risk assessment. In: 37th Annual IEEE/IFIP International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks, DSN 2007, pp. 338–346. IEEE (2007)
Bloomfield, R.E., Guerra, S., Miller, A., Masera, M., Weinstock, C.B.: International working group on assurance cases (for security). IEEE Secur. Priv. 4(3), 66–68 (2006)
Cyra, L., Gorski, J.: Supporting compliance with security standards by trust case templates. In: 2nd International Conference on Dependability of Computer Systems, DepCoS-RELCOMEX 2007, pp. 91–98. IEEE (2007)
Cyra, L., Gorski, J.: Support for argument structures review and assessment. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 96(1), 26–37 (2011)
Dempster, A.P.: New methods for reasoning towards posterior distributions based on sample data. Ann. Math. Stat. 37, 355–374 (1966)
Dempster, A.P.: Upper and lower probabilities induced by a multivalued mapping. Ann. Math. Stat. 38, 325–339 (1967)
Denney, E., Pai, G., Habli, I.: Towards measurement of confidence in safety cases. In: International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM), pp. 380–383. IEEE (2011)
Denœux, T.: The cautious rule of combination for belief functions and some extensions. In: 9th International Conference on Information Fusion, pp. 1–8. IEEE (2006)
DO-178C, ED-12C. Software considerations in airborne systems and equipment certification. RTCA/EUROCAE (2011)
Govier, T.: A Practical Study of Argument. Cengage Learning, Wadsworth (2013)
Guiochet, J., Do Hoang, Q.A., Kaaniche, M.: A model for safety case confidence assessment. In: Koornneef, F., van Gulijk, C. (eds.) SAFECOMP 2015. LNCS, vol. 9337, pp. 313–327. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-24255-2_23
Hawkins, R., Kelly, T., Knight, J., Graydon, P.: A new approach to creating clear safety arguments. In: Dale, C., Anderson, T. (eds.) Advances in Systems Safety, pp. 3–23. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)
ISO 26262. Software considerations in airborne systems and equipment certification. International Organization for Standardization (ISO) (2011)
Jøsang, A.: A logic for uncertain probabilities. Int. J. Uncertainty Fuzziness Knowl.-Based Syst. 9(03), 279–311 (2001)
Kelly, T.: Arguing safety - a systematic approach to safety case management. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of York (1998)
Kelly, T., McDermid, J.: Safety case construction and reuse using patterns. In: Daniel, P. (ed.) Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security (SAFECOMP), pp. 55–69. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)
Kelly, T., Weaver, R.: The goal structuring notation-a safety argument notation. In: Proceedings of the Dependable Systems and Networks (DSN) Workshop on Assurance Cases (2004)
Mercier, D., Quost, B., Denœux, T.: Contextual discounting of belief functions. In: Godo, L. (ed.) ECSQARU 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3571, pp. 552–562. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
Shafer, G.: A Mathematical Theory of Evidence, vol. 1. Princeton University Press Princeton, Princeton (1976)
Toulmin, S.E.: The Uses of Argument. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003)
Robert Andrew Weaver: The safety of software: constructing and assuring arguments. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of York (2003)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Wang, R., Guiochet, J., Motet, G., Schön, W. (2016). D-S Theory for Argument Confidence Assessment. In: Vejnarová, J., Kratochvíl, V. (eds) Belief Functions: Theory and Applications. BELIEF 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9861. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45559-4_20
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45559-4_20
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-45558-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-45559-4
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)