Failure Propagation Modeling Based on Contracts Theory

Nyberg, Mattias; Westman, Jonas

doi:10.1109/edcc.2015.21

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…1, there already exist approaches where contract theory is used to provide tool support. For example, contracts theory is used to provide tool support for safety analyzes in [19], safety certification in [69], modelbased design in [5], and failure propagation modeling in [56,57]. More similar to the present paper, the work [13,14] presents tool support for verifying contracts refinement, which in essence corresponds to verifying completeness.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 84%

“…Contract structures recast the notion of decomposition structures as presented in [73] in the context of RE concepts and extends the notion from two levels to an arbitrary number. A similar concept to a contract structure is presented in [56,57] based on Bayesian networks, but with the specific focus to model failure propagation.…”

Section: Contract Structure For Architecturementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Providing tool support for specifying safety-critical systems by enforcing syntactic contract conditions

Westman

Nyberg

2017

Requirements Eng

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Functional safety standards such as IEC 61508 and ISO 26262 advocate a particularly stringent requirements engineering where safety requirements must be structured in a hierarchical manner and specified in accordance with the system architecture. In contrast to the stringent requirements engineering in functional safety standards, according to previous studies, requirements engineering in industry is in general of poor quality. Contracts theory has been previously shown to be suitable for supporting such a stringent requirements engineering effort; this support has also been implemented in tools. However, to use these contract-based tools, requirements must be formalized, which is a major challenge in industry. Therefore, to support current industrial requirements engineering practice and the stringent requirements engineering in functional safety standards, it is shown how tool support can be provided even when requirements, and also architectures, are not formalized. This is achieved by enforcing syntactic, yet formal, conditions in contracts theory. Despite the need for further validation, initial findings in an industrial case study indicate high potential in realizing the proposed support in an industrial setting.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 84%

Section: Contract Structure For Architecturementioning

confidence: 99%

Providing tool support for specifying safety-critical systems by enforcing syntactic contract conditions

Westman

Nyberg

2017

Requirements Eng

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The main difference is, again, that while a composition structure represents a structuring of a two-level contract hierarchy in general, GORE models are more specific since the use of assumptions, also called expectations, in GORE models are strictly limited to top-level specifications that split the responsibilities between a SW system and its environment. Furthermore, a similar concept to a contract structure is presented in [80,81] based on Bayesian networks, but with the specific focus to model failure propagation.…”

Section: Definition 9 (Composition Structure Of Contract Hierarchy) Gmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conditions of contracts for separating responsibilities in heterogeneous systems

Westman

Nyberg

2017

Form Methods Syst Des

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A general, compositional, and component-based contract theory is proposed for modeling and specifying heterogeneous systems, characterized by consisting of parts from different domains, e.g. software, electrical and mechanical. Given a contract consisting of assumptions and a guarantee, clearly separated conditions on a component and its environment are presented where the conditions ensure that the guarantee is fulfilled-a responsibility assigned to the component, given that the environment fulfills the assumptions. The conditions are applicable whenever it cannot be ensured that the sets of ports of components are partitioned into inputs and outputs, and hence fully support scenarios where components, characterized by both causal and acausal models, are to be integrated by solely relying on the information of a contract. An example of such a scenario of industrial relevance is explicitly considered, namely a scenario in a supply chain where the development of a component is outsourced. To facilitate the application of the theory in practice, necessary properties of contracts are also derived to serve as sanity checks of the conditions. Furthermore, based on a graph that represents a structuring of a hierarchy of contracts, sufficient conditions to achieve compositionality are presented.

show abstract