Supporting the verification of compliance to safety standards via model-driven engineering: Approach, tool-support and empirical validation

Panesar-Walawege, Rajwinder Kaur; Sabetzadeh, Mehrdad; Briand, Lionel C.

doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2012.11.009

Cited by 52 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some are generic (e.g., [20]) and others have been created for safety evidence management according to specific safety standards, e.g. IEC 61508 [30]. Finally, there exist other standardization efforts for assurance cases in addition to SACM.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

An analysis of safety evidence management with the Structured Assurance Case Metamodel

Génova

Álvarez-Rodríguez

Lloréns

2017

Computer Standards & Interfaces

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

An analysis of safety evidence management with the Structured Assurance Case Metamodel

Génova

Álvarez-Rodríguez

Lloréns

2017

Computer Standards & Interfaces

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…We advocate the use of model-based approaches to tackle these challenges. Models can facilitate the understanding of safety standards [8], the identification of inconsistencies in their text [9], the determination of the evidence to collect [3], the specification of traceability requirements [10], and compliance assessment [11]. There is evidence of the use of models in industry for safety compliance purposes [1,2].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the current approaches are standard-specific (e.g. for IEC 61508 [8]) or address only partial safety compliance needs (e.g. process compliance [12]).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The models have addressed specific aspects of the standards, such as their processes [20][21][22], artefact traceability [23,24], system specification [17,18,25], system architecture [26,27], quality-related aspects [28], faults [29], and testing [30]. The models in [8,25] address both process and system specification. Models for more than one safety standard can also be found.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The main weakness of these models is that they cannot be directly applied for demonstrating compliance with other safety standards. For example, the IEC 61508 model proposed in [8] does not support demonstration of compliance with DO-178. These models could also be represented with the RAF metamodel and thus can be regarded as RAF models.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Model-based specification of safety compliance needs for critical systems: A holistic generic metamodel

Ruíz

Attwood

Espinoza

et al. 2016

Information and Software Technology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

eprints@whiterose.ac.uk https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ Reuse Unless indicated otherwise, fulltext items are protected by copyright with all rights reserved. The copyright exception in section 29 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 allows the making of a single copy solely for the purpose of non-commercial research or private study within the limits of fair dealing. The publisher or other rights-holder may allow further reproduction and re-use of this version -refer to the White Rose Research Online record for this item. Where records identify the publisher as the copyright holder, users can verify any specific terms of use on the publisher's website. TakedownIf you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing eprints@whiterose.ac.uk including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. Model-Based Specification of Safety Compliance Needs for CriticalSystems: A Holistic Generic Metamodel! Abstract!Context: Many critical systems must comply with safety standards as a way of providing assurance that they do not pose undue risks to people, property, or the environment. Safety compliance is a very demanding activity, as the standards can consist of hundreds of pages and practitioners typically have to show the fulfilment of thousands of safety-related criteria. Furthermore, the text of the standards can be ambiguous, inconsistent, and hard to understand, making it difficult to determine how to effectively structure and manage safety compliance information. These issues become even more challenging when a system is intended to be reused in another application domain with different applicable standards.Objective: This paper aims to resolve these issues by providing a metamodel for the specification of safety compliance needs for critical systems. Method: The metamodel is holistic and generic, and abstracts common concepts for demonstrating safety compliance from different standards and application domains. Its application results in the specification of Òreference assurance frameworksÓ for safety-critical systems, which correspond to a model of the safety criteria of a given standard. For validating the metamodel with safety standards, parts of several standards have been modelled by both academic and industry personnel, and other standards have been analysed. We further augment this with feedback from practitioners, including feedback during a workshop. Results:The results from the validation show that the metamodel can be used to specify safety compliance needs for aerospace, automotive, avionics, defence, healthcare, machinery, maritime, oil and gas, process industry, railway, and robotics. Practitioners consider that the metamodel can meet their needs and find benefits in its use. Conclusion:The metamodel supports the specification of safety compliance needs for most critical computer-based and software-intensive systems. The resulting models can provide an effective means of structuring and managing safety compliance infor...

show abstract

Compliance checking of software processes: A systematic literature review

Ardila

Gallina

Muram

2022

J Software Evolu Process

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The processes used to develop software need to comply with normative requirements (e.g., standards and regulations) to align with the market and the law. Manual compliance checking is challenging because there are numerous requirements with changing nature and different purposes. Despite the importance of automated techniques, there is not any systematic study in this field. This lack may hinder organizations from moving toward automated compliance checking practices. In this paper, we characterize the methods for automatic compliance checking of software processes, including used techniques, potential impacts, and challenges. For this, we undertake a systematic literature review (SLR) of studies reporting methods in this field. As a result, we identify solutions that use different techniques (e.g., anthologies and metamodels) to represent processes and their artifacts (e.g., tasks and roles). Various languages, which have diverse capabilities for managing competing and changing norms, and agile strategies, are also used to represent normative requirements. Most solutions require tool‐support concretization and enhanced capabilities to handle processes and normative diversity. Our findings outline compelling areas for future research. In particular, there is a need to select suitable languages for consolidating a generic and normative‐agnostic solution, increase automation levels, tool support, and boost the application in practice by improving usability aspects.

show abstract

Supporting the verification of compliance to safety standards via model-driven engineering: Approach, tool-support and empirical validation

Cited by 52 publications

References 7 publications

An analysis of safety evidence management with the Structured Assurance Case Metamodel

An analysis of safety evidence management with the Structured Assurance Case Metamodel

Model-based specification of safety compliance needs for critical systems: A holistic generic metamodel

Compliance checking of software processes: A systematic literature review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About