A Systematic Approach to Safety Case Maintenance
SAFECOMP '99 Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Computer Computer Safety, Reliability and Security
Confidence: Its Role in Dependability Cases for Risk Assessment
DSN '07 Proceedings of the 37th Annual IEEE/IFIP International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks
Conditional deduction under uncertainty
ECSQARU'05 Proceedings of the 8th European conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty
Analysing Dependability Case Arguments Using Quality Models
SAFECOMP '09 Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security
SCF - A framework supporting achieving and assessing conformity with standards
Computer Standards & Interfaces
A systematic approach to justifying sufficient confidence in software safety arguments
SAFECOMP'12 Proceedings of the 31st international conference on Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
Argument structures are commonly used to develop and present cases for safety, security and other properties. Such argument structures tend to grow excessively. To deal with this problem, appropriate methods of their assessment are required. Two objectives are of particular interest: (1) systematic and explicit assessment of the compelling power of an argument, and (2) communication of the result of such an assessment to relevant recipients. The paper gives details of a new method which deals with both problems. We explain how to issue assessments and how they can be aggregated depending on the types of inference used in arguments. The method is fully implemented in a software tool. Its application is illustrated by examples. The paper also includes the results of experiments carried out to validate and calibrate the method.