[SystemSafety] Research topics

[Ian Broster]

Continuing from the comment below, I can note the PROARTIS research  
project in this area.

http://www.proartis-project.eu/

The project concerns timing verification, mostly worst case execution time.

The story goes like this:

  1. We'd like to use statistics (for the reasons outlined nicely by Tom  
Ferrell)

  2. If we make the hardware/software have time-randomized behaviour (not  
functional!) e.g. random cache replacement, then we can properly  
justify/invent/use use statistical methods

  3. Now that have the methods - to what extent can they be applied to  
systems without novel time-randomized hardware behaviour.

A very interesting and applicable project that is being followed up by a  
project called PROXIMA starting later this year.

Ian


On Mon, 15 Jul 2013 15:07:45 +0100, Tom Ferrell <tom at faaconsulting.com>  
wrote:

>
> Three from the aviation design assurance area:
>
> 1.       Stochastic or empirical validation of individual DO-178B  
> objectives
>
> 2.       Stochastic or empirical validation of individual DO-254  
> objectives
>
> 3.       Methods for assuring marginally non-deterministic  
> safety-critical embedded >systems
>
>
> The first two are tough due to data access issues but would be  
> incredibly useful in >understanding the incremental increases in safety  
> margin that accrue from the >application of specific and prescriptive  
> design assurance objectives.  >Scientifically answered whether we have  
> the right objectives has simply not been >accomplished even after  
> decades of applying these particular standards.  The last >one is a  
> realization (IMHO) that the path we are on with ever more prescriptive  
> >objectives for demonstrating lock-step determinism in highly complex  
> embedded >architectures (e.g., multicore) is likely to be cost  
> prohibitive in the near future >and that better value may be obtained by  
> abstracting out (in some cases) to a >higher level of determinism.  In  
> other words, it may be less important to know >exactly what is happening  
> at each clock count at the digital level than it is to >know I get a  
> bounded response within a defined time window.
>
> From: systemsafety-bounces at techfak.uni-bielefeld.de  
> [mailto:systemsafety-bounces at techfak.uni->bielefeld.de] On Behalf Of  
> René Senden
> Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 9:54 AM
> To: systemsafety at techfak.uni-bielefeld.de
> Subject: Re: [SystemSafety] Research topics
>
>
> Contribution from Andy Loebl...
>
>
> From: Loebl, Andy [mailto:loeblas at ornl.gov]Sent: maandag 15 juli 2013  
> 14:40
> To: René Senden
> Subject: RE: [SystemSafety] Research topics
>
>
> 1—Waste, Fraud and Abuse in U.S. Public Healthcare claims data.
>
> 2—Physics based Electricity Grid modeling in the U.S. for understanding  
> demand-side >system faults causing outages.
>
> 3—extending STAMP to understand U.S. security systems vulnerabilities to  
> terrorism
>
>
> From: systemsafety-bounces at techfak.uni-bielefeld.de  
> [mailto:systemsafety-bounces at techfak.uni->bielefeld.de] On Behalf Of  
> René Senden
> Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 6:13 AM
> To: systemsafety at techfak.uni-bielefeld.de
> Subject: [SystemSafety] Research topics
>
>
> Suppose you were to prioritize, say, 3 research topics. Which would you  
> select?



-- 
Ian Broster
Rapita Systems Ltd
Tel: +44 1904 567 747
Mob: +44 7963 469 090


Stay informed by joining the Rapita Systems mailing list

http://www.rapitasystems.com/rapita/mailing_list



For real-time verifications issues and discussion, follow

the Rapita Systems blog

http://www.rapitasystems.com/blog



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de/mailman/private/systemsafety/attachments/20130715/8c8290b6/attachment.html>