This content is not included in your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.
Dissolution of the Gap between Safety Requirements Written in a Natural Language and Formal Notations
ISSN: 0148-7191, e-ISSN: 2688-3627
Published April 05, 2016 by SAE International in United States
Annotation ability available
Safety concepts are essential to conform to functional safety standard ISO 26262 for automotive products. Safety requirements, which are a part of safety concepts, shall be satisfied by products to avoid hazards by vehicles to maintain their safety. Incompleteness of safety requirements must be avoided in deriving parent requirements to its children. However, measure for checking is only reviewing when the safety requirements are described in a natural language. This measure for checking is not objective or stringent.
We developed a specification technique written in formal notation that addresses some of the shortcomings of capturing safety requirements for verification purposes. Safety requirements in this notation are expressed in goal tree models, which originate from goal-oriented requirement engineering Knowledge Acquisition in autOmated Specification (KAOS). Each requirement is written with propositional logic as the node of a tree. Completeness is automatically verified with a Boolean satisfiability (SAT) solver for each set of a parent goal and its children.
We found that the point of view to derive requirements was different between a natural language and the above formal specification. This leads to the difference in the hierarchical structure of requirements, and makes it difficult to convert them from one to the other. A method of supporting this conversion is proposed here as a solution by associating typical structures of requirements in a natural language and the formal specification. This solution is expected to strengthen the reliability of safety requirements by promoting the application of the formal specification technique.
CitationMatsubara, M., Narisawa, F., Ohno, A., Aoki, T. et al., "Dissolution of the Gap between Safety Requirements Written in a Natural Language and Formal Notations," SAE Technical Paper 2016-01-0133, 2016, https://doi.org/10.4271/2016-01-0133.
- ISO 26262 Road vehicles - functional safety 2011
- Aoki T. , Traichaiyaporn K. , Chiba Y. , Matsubara M. , Nishi M. and Narisawa F. Modeling Safety Requirements of ISO26262 using Goal Trees and Patterns International Workshop on Formal Techniques for Safety-Critical Systems(FTSCS) 108 124 2015
- Lamsweerde A. van Requirements Engineering: From System Goals to UML Models to Software Specifications Wiley 2011
- Weaver R. A. and Kelly T. P. The goal structuring notation-a safety argument notation Workshop on Assurance Cases, Dependable Systems and Networks 2004
- Kelly T. P. and McDermid J. A. Safety case construction and reuse using patterns Safe Comp 97 55 69 Springer 1997
- Denney E. , Pai G. , and Whiteside I. Formal Foundations for Hierarchical Safety Cases International Symposium on High Assurance Systems Engineering 52 59 2015
- Denney E. and Pai G. A Formal Basis for Safety Case Patterns SAFE-COMP 2013 LNCS 8153 21 32 2013
- Darimont R. and Lamsweerde A. van Formal refinement patterns for goal-driven requirements elaboration ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes 21 6 179 190 1996
- Rubio-Loyola J. et al. A functional solution for goal-oriented policy refinement Policies for Distributed Systems and Networks 133 144 2006
- Minisat http://minisat.se/
- Gamma E. , Helm R. , Johnson R. , and Vlissides J. Design Patterns - Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software Pearson Education 1995
- Lamsweerde A. van , Dardenne A. , Delcourt B. , and Dubisy F. The KAOS Project: Knowledge Acquisition in Automated Specification of Software Proceedings of AAAI Spring Symposium Series, Stanford University, American Association for Artificial Intelligence 59 62 1991
- Tobias K. A survey and classification of controlled natural languages Computational Linguistics 40 1 121 170 2014