ALBERT

All Library Books, journals and Electronic Records Telegrafenberg

X
feed icon rss

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
  • 1
    facet.materialart.
    Unknown
    The Strengths and Weaknesses of Logic Formalisms to Support Mishap Analysis (2002)
    In:  CASI
    Details
    Publication Date: 2018-06-05
    Description: The increasing complexity of many safety critical systems poses new problems for mishap analysis. Techniques developed in the sixties and seventies cannot easily scale-up to analyze incidents involving tightly integrated software and hardware components. Similarly, the realization that many failures have systemic causes has widened the scope of many mishap investigations. Organizations, including NASA and the NTSB, have responded by starting research and training initiatives to ensure that their personnel are well equipped to meet these challenges. One strand of research has identified a range of mathematically based techniques that can be used to reason about the causes of complex, adverse events. The proponents of these techniques have argued that they can be used to formally prove that certain events created the necessary and sufficient causes for a mishap to occur. Mathematical proofs can reduce the bias that is often perceived to effect the interpretation of adverse events. Others have opposed the introduction of these techniques by identifying social and political aspects to incident investigation that cannot easily be reconciled with a logic-based approach. Traditional theorem proving mechanisms cannot accurately capture the wealth of inductive, deductive and statistical forms of inference that investigators routinely use in their analysis of adverse events. This paper summarizes some of the benefits that logics provide, describes their weaknesses, and proposes a number of directions for future research.
    Keywords: Systems Analysis and Operations Research
    Format: application/pdf
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
    NASA TECHNICAL REPORTS
  • 2
    facet.materialart.
    Unknown
    Reducing Our Ignorance: Finding Answers to Certain Epistemic Questions for Software Systems (2011)
    In:  CASI
    Details
    Publication Date: 2019-07-13
    Description: In previous papers, we asserted that software system safety is primarily concerned with epistemic questions, that is, questions concerning knowledge and the degree of confidence that can be placed in that knowledge. We also enumerated a set of 21 foundational epistemic questions, discussed some of the difficulties that exist in answering these questions adequately today, and speculated briefly on possible research that may provide improved confidence in the sufficiency of answers in the future. This paper focuses on three of the foundational questions. For each of these questions, current answers are discussed and potential research is proposed to help increase the justifiable level of confidence.
    Keywords: Systems Analysis and Operations Research
    Type: NF1676L-12556 , 6th IET International System Safety Conference 2011; Sep 20, 2011 - Sep 22, 2011; Birmingham; United Kingdom
    Format: application/pdf
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
    NASA TECHNICAL REPORTS
  • 3
    facet.materialart.
    Unknown
    A Possible Approach for Addressing Neglected Human Factors Issues of Systems Engineering (2011)
    In:  CASI
    Details
    Publication Date: 2019-07-13
    Description: The increasing complexity of safety-critical applications has led to the introduction of decision support tools in the transportation and process industries. Automation has also been introduced to support operator intervention in safety-critical applications. These innovations help reduce overall operator workload, and filter application data to maximize the finite cognitive and perceptual resources of system operators. However, these benefits do not come without a cost. Increased computational support for the end-users of safety-critical applications leads to increased reliance on engineers to monitor and maintain automated systems and decision support tools. This paper argues that by focussing on the end-users of complex applications, previous research has tended to neglect the demands that are being placed on systems engineers. The argument is illustrated through discussing three recent accidents. The paper concludes by presenting a possible strategy for building and using highly automated systems based on increased attention by management and regulators, improvements in competency and training for technical staff, sustained support for engineering team resource management, and the development of incident reporting systems for infrastructure failures. This paper represents preliminary work, about which we seek comments and suggestions.
    Keywords: Systems Analysis and Operations Research
    Type: NF1676L-12585 , 6th IET International System Safety Conference 2011; Sep 20, 2011 - Sep 22, 2011; Birmingham; United Kingdom
    Format: application/pdf
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
    NASA TECHNICAL REPORTS
  • 4
    facet.materialart.
    Unknown
    A Taxonomy of Fallacies in System Safety Arguments (2006)
    In:  CASI
    Details
    Publication Date: 2019-07-13
    Description: Safety cases are gaining acceptance as assurance vehicles for safety-related systems. A safety case documents the evidence and argument that a system is safe to operate; however, logical fallacies in the underlying argument may undermine a system s safety claims. Removing these fallacies is essential to reduce the risk of safety-related system failure. We present a taxonomy of common fallacies in safety arguments that is intended to assist safety professionals in avoiding and detecting fallacious reasoning in the arguments they develop and review. The taxonomy derives from a survey of general argument fallacies and a separate survey of fallacies in real-world safety arguments. Our taxonomy is specific to safety argumentation, and it is targeted at professionals who work with safety arguments but may lack formal training in logic or argumentation. We discuss the rationale for the selection and categorization of fallacies in the taxonomy. In addition to its applications to the development and review of safety cases, our taxonomy could also support the analysis of system failures and promote the development of more robust safety case patterns.
    Keywords: Systems Analysis and Operations Research
    Type: 24th International System Safety Conference; Jul 31, 2006 - Aug 04, 2006; Albuquerque, NM; United States
    Format: application/pdf
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
    NASA TECHNICAL REPORTS
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...