Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3387940.3391474acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Towards automated safety analysis for architectures of dynamically forming networks of cyber-physical systems

Published: 25 September 2020 Publication History

Abstract

Dynamically forming networks of cyber-physical systems are becoming increasingly widespread in manufacturing, transportation, automotive, avionics and more domains. The emergence of future internet technology and the ambition for ever closer integration of different systems leads to highly collaborative cyber-physical systems. Such cyber-physical systems form networks to provide additional functions, behavior, and benefits the individual systems cannot provide on their own. As safety is a major concern of systems from these domains, there is a need to provide adequate support for safety analyses of these collaborative cyber-physical systems. This support must explicitly consider the dynamically formed networks of cyber-physical systems. This is a challenging task as the configurations of these cyber-physical system networks (i.e. the architecture of the super system the individual system joins) can differ enormously depending on the actual systems joining a cyber-physical system network. Furthermore, the configuration of the network heavily impacts the adaptations performed by the individual systems and thereby impacting the architecture not only of the system network but of all individual systems involved. As existing safety analysis techniques, however, are not meant for supporting such an array of potential system network configurations the individual system will have to be able to cope with at runtime, we propose automated support for safety analysis for these systems that considers the configuration of the system network. Initial evaluation results from the application to industrial case examples show that the proposed support can aid in the detection of safety defects.

References

[1]
Adrion, W.R. et al. 1982. Validation, Verification, and Testing of Computer Software. ACM Comput. Surv. 14, 2 (Jun. 1982), 159--192.
[2]
Alkhabbas, F. et al. 2017. Architecting Emergent Configurations in the Internet of Things. 2017 IEEE International Conference on Software Architecture (ICSA) (Apr. 2017), 221--224.
[3]
Allenby, K. and Kelly, T. 2001. Deriving safety requirements using scenarios. Proceedings Fifth IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering (2001), 228--235.
[4]
Alvares, F. et al. 2015. High-Level Language Support for Reconfiguration Control in Component-Based Architectures. Software Architecture (2015), 3--19.
[5]
Aughenbaugh, J.M. and Paredis, C.J.J. 2004. The role and limitations of modeling and simulation in systems design. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Computers and Information in Engineering Division, CED (2004), 13--22.
[6]
Binder, R.V. 1999. Testing object-oriented systems: Models, patterns, and tools. Addison-Wesley.
[7]
Broy, M. 2012. Engineering Cyber-Physical Systems: Challenges and Foundations. Complex Systems Design & Management, Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Complex Systems Design & Management CSD&M 2012, Paris, France, December 12-14, 2012 (2012), 1--13.
[8]
Bures, T. et al. 2016. Statistical Approach to Architecture Modes in Smart Cyber Physical Systems. 2016 13th Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture (WICSA) (Apr. 2016), 168--177.
[9]
Byagowi, A. et al. 2012. Accidental emergence within an agent based model: Simulation of agent interactions in an emergency situation. Proc. CGAMES USA - Int. Conf. Comput. Games: AI, Anim., Mob., Interact. Multimedia, Educ. Serious Games (2012), 189--193.
[10]
Cavalcante, E. et al. 2016. Statistical Model Checking of Dynamic Software Architectures. Software Architecture (2016), 185--200.
[11]
Cavalcante, E. et al. 2015. Supporting Dynamic Software Architectures: From Architectural Description to Implementation. 2015 12th Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture (May 2015), 31--40.
[12]
Chiprianov, V. et al. 2014. Architectural Support for Model-Driven Performance Prediction of Distributed Real-Time Embedded Systems of Systems. Software Architecture (2014), 357--364.
[13]
Choi, Y. and Byun, T. 2017. Constraint-based test generation for automotive operating systems. Software & Systems Modeling. 16, 1 (Feb. 2017), 7--24.
[14]
Clarke, E.M. et al. 1999. Model checking. MIT Press.
[15]
Clarke, E.M. et al. 2009. Model checking: algorithmic verification and debugging. Commun. ACM. 52, 11 (2009), 74--84.
[16]
Cohen, D. et al. 1997. Automatic Monitoring of Software Requirements. Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Software Engineering (New York, NY, USA, 1997), 602--603.
[17]
Czarnecki, K. et al. 2005. Formalizing cardinality-based feature models and their specialization. Software Process: Improvement and Practice. 10, 1 (Jan. 2005), 7--29.
[18]
Engelfriet, J. et al. 2002. Compositional Verification of Multi-Agent Systems in Temporal Multi-Epistemic Logic. Journal of Logic, Language and Information. 11, 2 (Mar. 2002), 195--225.
[19]
Faniyi, F. et al. 2014. Architecting Self-Aware Software Systems. 2014 IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture (Apr. 2014), 91--94.
[20]
Fickas, S. and Feather, M.S. 1995. Requirements monitoring in dynamic environments., Proceedings of the Second IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering, 1995 (Mar. 1995), 140--147.
[21]
García, S. et al. 2018. An Architecture for Decentralized, Collaborative, and Autonomous Robots. 2018 IEEE International Conference on Software Architecture (ICSA) (Apr. 2018), 75--7509.
[22]
Gerostathopoulos, I. et al. 2016. Architectural Homeostasis in Self-Adaptive Software-Intensive Cyber-Physical Systems. Software Architecture (2016), 113--128.
[23]
Ghezzi, C. and Mocci, A. 2012. Behavioral validation of JFSL specifications through model synthesis. 34th International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE 2012 (Zurich, 2012), 936--946.
[24]
Gürbüz, H.G. et al. 2014. Safety Perspective for Supporting Architectural Design of Safety-Critical Systems. Software Architecture (2014), 365--373.
[25]
Haumer, P. et al. 1999. Bridging the gap between past and future in RE: a scenario-based approach. IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering, 1999. Proceedings (1999), 66--73.
[26]
International Telecommunication Union 2011. Message Sequence Chart (MSC). Technical Report #Z 120. International Telecommunication Union.
[27]
Jonker, C.M. and Treur, J. 2002. Compositional verification of multi-agent systems: A formal analysis of pro-activeness and reactiveness. International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems. 11, 1-2 (2002), 51--91.
[28]
Li, Z. et al. 2006. A Survey of Emergent Behavior and Its Impacts in Agent-based Systems. 2006 4th IEEE International Conference on Industrial Informatics (Aug. 2006), 1295--1300.
[29]
Miller, J. et al. 1998. Further Experiences with Scenarios and Checklists. Empirical Software Engineering. 3, 1 (1998), 37--64.
[30]
Mogul, J.C. 2006. Emergent (Mis)Behavior vs. Complex Software Systems. Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGOPS/EuroSys European Conference on Computer Systems 2006 (New York, NY, USA, 2006), 293--304.
[31]
Muccini, H. and Sharaf, M. 2017. CAPS: Architecture Description of Situational Aware Cyber Physical Systems. 2017 IEEE International Conference on Software Architecture (ICSA) (Apr. 2017), 211--220.
[32]
Oquendo, F. 2016. Software Architecture Challenges and Emerging Research in Software-Intensive Systems-of-Systems. Software Architecture (2016), 3--21.
[33]
Romero, D. et al. 2015. SmartyCo: Managing Cyber-Physical Systems for Smart Environments. Software Architecture (2015), 294--302.
[34]
Tenbergen, B. et al. 2018. View-Centric Context Modeling to Foster the Engineering of Cyber-Physical System Networks. IEEE International Conference on Software Architecture, ICSA 2018, Seattle, WA, USA, April 30-May 4, 2018 (2018), 206--216.
[35]
Weyns, D. et al. 2018. Applying Architecture-Based Adaptation to Automate the Management of Internet-of-Things. Software Architecture (2018), 49--67.
[36]
Wolf, W. 2009. Cyber-physical Systems. Computer. 42, 3 (Mar. 2009), 88--89.
[37]
1996. Guidelines and Methods for Conducting the Safety Assessment Process on Civil Airborne Systems and Equipment. Technical Report #4761. SAE International.
[38]
2011. ISO 26262-1:2011 Road vehicles -- Functional safety.

Cited By

View all
  • (2022)Evaluation of Systems-of-Systems Software Architectures: State of the Art and Future PerspectivesACM Computing Surveys10.1145/351902055:4(1-35)Online publication date: 21-Nov-2022

Index Terms

  1. Towards automated safety analysis for architectures of dynamically forming networks of cyber-physical systems

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    ICSEW'20: Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM 42nd International Conference on Software Engineering Workshops
    June 2020
    831 pages
    ISBN:9781450379632
    DOI:10.1145/3387940
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

    Sponsors

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 25 September 2020

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. cyber-physical system
    2. safety analysis
    3. system architecture

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Funding Sources

    • Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung

    Conference

    ICSE '20
    Sponsor:
    ICSE '20: 42nd International Conference on Software Engineering
    June 27 - July 19, 2020
    Seoul, Republic of Korea

    Upcoming Conference

    ICSE 2025

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)14
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2
    Reflects downloads up to 30 Aug 2024

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2022)Evaluation of Systems-of-Systems Software Architectures: State of the Art and Future PerspectivesACM Computing Surveys10.1145/351902055:4(1-35)Online publication date: 21-Nov-2022

    View Options

    Get Access

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media