Biblio

From financial services platforms to social networks to vehicle control, software has come to mediate many activities of daily life. Governing bodies and standards organizations have responded to this trend by creating regulations and standards to address issues such as safety, security and privacy. In this environment, the compliance of software development to standards and regulations has emerged as a key requirement. Compliance claims and arguments are often captured in assurance cases, with linked evidence of compliance. Evidence can come from testcases, verification proofs, human judgement, or a combination of these. That is, we try to build (safety-critical) systems carefully according to well justified methods and articulate these justifications in an assurance case that is ultimately judged by a human. Yet software is deeply rooted in uncertainty making pragmatic assurance more inductive than deductive: most of complex open-world functionality is either not completely specifiable (due to uncertainty) or it is not cost-effective to do so, and deductive verification cannot happen without specification. Inductive assurance, achieved by sampling or testing, is easier but generalization from finite set of examples cannot be formally justified. And of course the recent popularity of constructing software via machine learning only worsens the problem - rather than being specified by predefined requirements, machine-learned components learn existing patterns from the available training data, and make predictions for unseen data when deployed. On the surface, this ability is extremely useful for hard-to specify concepts, e.g., the definition of a pedestrian in a pedestrian detection component of a vehicle. On the other, safety assessment and assurance of such components becomes very challenging. In this talk, I focus on two specific approaches to arguing about safety and security of software under uncertainty. The first one is a framework for managing uncertainty in assurance cases (for "conventional" and "machine-learned" systems) by systematically identifying, assessing and addressing it. The second is recent work on supporting development of requirements for machine-learned components in safety-critical domains.

Software has emerged as a significant part of many domains, including financial service platforms, social networks and vehicle control. Standards organizations have responded to this by creating regulations to address issues such as safety and privacy. In this context, compliance of software with standards has emerged as a key issue. For software development organizations, compliance is a complex and costly goal to achieve and is often accomplished by producing so-called assurance cases, which demonstrate that the system indeed satisfies the property imposed by a standard (e.g., safety, privacy, security). As systems and standards undergo evolution for a variety of reasons, maintaining assurance cases multiplies the effort. In this work, we propose to exploit the connection between the field of model management and the problem of compliance management and propose methods that use model management techniques to address compliance scenarios such as assurance case evolution and reuse. For validation, we ground our approaches on the automotive domain and the ISO 26262 standard for functional safety of road vehicles.

With the application and promotion of electric vehicles, vehicle security problems caused by actuator reliability have become increasingly prominent. Firstly, the paper analyses and sums motor failure modes and their effects of permanent magnet synchronous motor (PMSM) , which is commonly used on electric vehicles. And then design a hierarchical structure of the vehicle control strategies and the corresponding algorithms, and adjust based on the different failure modes. Finally conduct simulation conditions in CarSim environment. Verify the control strategy and algorithm can maintain vehicle stability and reduce the burden on driver under motor failure conditions.