next up previous
Next: Research Partners Up: ARGSAFE: Using Argumentation for Previous: News

Project Objectives

Motivation. Increasingly, safety regulatory bodies require the developers of critical software systems to provide explicit safety cases - defined in terms of structured arguments based on objective evidence - in order to prove that the system is acceptable safe [#!Simula10!#]. Argumentative-based safety cases are progressively adopted in the defense (UK), automotive, railways, off-shore oil & gas, or medical device domains. Consequently, this research aims i) to identify links between argumentation theory and engineering of safety systems, ii) to develop argumentation methods to transfer confidence in safety-critical software systems. iii) to apply the developed technical instrumentation at two case studies: 1) safeness of autonomous driving software, respectively 2) justifying correctness of firewall configuration. System capabilities include 1) automatic norm checking for compliance, 2) safety reports generation, 3) facilitating understanding and confidence transfer.

Objectives. The top level scientific objective regards safety assurance of software systems by means of argumentation theory. A second objective would be to increase the cooperation of the research groups from Technical University of Cluj-Napoca with those from Universidad National del Sur. Two strategies are enacted to achieve it: 1) writing papers with authors from both countries and 2) organising a workshop in Romania and one workshop in Argentina. We intend to co-locate the Romanian workshop with the 10th International Conference on Intelligent Computer Communication and Processing organised by the Computer Science Department of TUCN on September 2014. A traditional track of the conference is represented by agreement technologies and argumentative agents, which is in line with the topic of the bilateral project.

Table: Objectives of the ARGSAFE project.
Date Objectives Novelty Associated Tasks
Jun 2013 O1. Analysis the problem of justifying safeness of complex technical systems. Identifying the possibilities of integrating argumentation theory, quality standards and ontologies. Formal analysis of quality standards. Identifying factors affecting confidence in safeness of software systems.
Sep 2013 O2. Developing the assurance model based on argumentation theory. Justificative reasoning in the context of heterogeneous and contradictory evidence Developing the defeasible justification logic. Contextualising evidence.
May 2014 O3. Developing the system of justifying safeness of complex technical system. Automatic identification of inconsistent justifications. Developing a generic ontology for hazards. Organising the first ARGSAFE workshop.
Sep 2014 O4. Applying the system for safeness assurance of autonomous driving systems. Organising evidence, building arguments and counter-arguments. Formalising safeness requirements. Formalising assumptions regarding operating mode and specific hazards.
Dec 2014 O5 Applying the system for verifying correctness of firewall configuration Presenting arguments for decision support under temporal constraints Identifying inconsistency in security rule-based systems. Organising the second ARGSAFE workshop.
Mar 2015 O6. Developing a methodology of exploiting structured arguments in safeness assurance Re-using safety cases. Re-engineering complex software systems based on arguments. Defining patterns of safety cases. Stating the principle of building arguments when developing complex software systems. Identifying applications for the proposed model.

next up previous
Next: Research Partners Up: ARGSAFE: Using Argumentation for Previous: News
adrian 2013-09-15