Browse by author
Lookup NU author(s): Professor Michael Harrison
Full text for this publication is not currently held within this repository. Alternative links are provided below where available.
Descriptive arguments are an intrinsic part of the process of determining the dependability of any system, particularly in the case of safety critical systems. For such systems, safety cases are constructed to demonstrate that a system meets dependability requirements. This process includes the application of hazard analysis techniques. However, such techniques are error-prone, time consuming and apply “ad hoc” reuse. Hence, the use of systematic, exhaustive hazard analysis can lead to an illusion of high confidence in the parent dependability argument that is compromised by lack of rigour.We have investigated the application of structure and reuse techniques to improve hazard classification arguments and their associated parent dependability arguments. A structure for hazard arguments has been presented and an example from a software hazard analysis has been exemplified using XML. Using two methods of structural reuse, hazard arguments can be improved for both argument generation and post argument construction analysis.
Author(s): Smith SP, Harrison MD
Editor(s): Gacek, C.
Publication type: Conference Proceedings (inc. Abstract)
Publication status: Published
Conference Name: Software Reuse: Methods, Techniques, and Tools (ICSR-7)
Year of Conference: 2002
ISSN: 0302-9743 (Print) 1611-3349 (Online)
Library holdings: Search Newcastle University Library for this item
Series Title: Lecture Notes in Computer Science