Abstract
Compliance with the automotive standard ISO 26262 requires the development of a safety case for electrical and/or electronic (E/E) systems whose malfunction has the potential to lead to an unreasonable level of risk. In order to justify freedom from unreasonable risk, a safety argument should be developed in which the safety requirements are shown to be complete and satisfied by the evidence generated from the ISO 26262 work products. However, the standard does not provide practical guidelines for how it should be developed and reviewed. More importantly, the standard does not describe how the safety argument should be evaluated in the functional safety assessment process. In this paper, we categorise and analyse the main argument structures required of a safety case and specify the relationships that exist between these structures. Particular emphasis is placed on the importance of the product-based safety rationale within the argument and the role this rationale should play in assessing functional safety. The approach is evaluated in an industrial case study. The paper concludes with a discussion of the potential benefits and challenges of structured safety arguments for evaluating the rationale, assumptions and evidence put forward when claiming compliance with ISO 26262.
Access provided by Autonomous University of Puebla. Download to read the full chapter text
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
ISO: ISO 26262 Road Vehicles– Functional Safety. ISO Standard (2011)
Graydon, P., Habli, I., Hawkins, R., Kelly, T., Knight: Arguing conformance. IEEE Software 29(3) (2012)
Bishop, P., Bloomfield, R.: A methodology for safety case development. In: Proc. 6th Safety-critical Sys. Symp. (1998)
Kelly, T.: A systematic approach to safety case management. In: Proc. Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) World Congress (2004)
The Health Foundation, Using Safety Cases in Industry and Healthcare (2012) ISBN: 978-1-906461-43-0
Dittel, T., Aryus, H.-J.: How to “Survive” a safety case according to ISO 26262. In: Schoitsch, E. (ed.) SAFECOMP 2010. LNCS, vol. 6351, pp. 97–111. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)
Palin, R., Habli, I.: Assurance of automotive safety – A safety case approach. In: Schoitsch, E. (ed.) SAFECOMP 2010. LNCS, vol. 6351, pp. 82–96. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)
Habli, I., Kelly, I.: Process and product certification arguments: getting the balance right. SIGBED Review 3(4) (2006)
Langari, Z., Maibaum, T.: Safety cases: a review of challenges. In: International Workshop on Assurance Cases for Software-intensive Systems (ASSURE 2013), San Francisco (2013)
Denney, E., Pai, G., Habli, I.: Towards measurement of confidence in safety cases. In: Proc. 5th Intl. Symp. on Empirical Soft. Eng. and Measurement, pp. 380–383 (September 2011)
Ayoub, A., Kim, B., Lee, I., Sokolsky, O.: A systematic approach to justifying sufficient confidence in software safety arguments. In: Ortmeier, F., Lipaczewski, M. (eds.) SAFECOMP 2012. LNCS, vol. 7612, pp. 305–316. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
Goal Structuring Notation Working Group: GSN Community Standard Version 1 (2011)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Birch, J. et al. (2013). Safety Cases and Their Role in ISO 26262 Functional Safety Assessment. In: Bitsch, F., Guiochet, J., Kaâniche, M. (eds) Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security. SAFECOMP 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8153. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40793-2_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40793-2_15
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-40792-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-40793-2
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)