Abstract
Assurance cases are structured logical arguments supported by evidence that explain how systems, possibly software systems, satisfy desirable properties for safety, security or reliability. The confidence in both the logical reasoning and the underlying evidence is a factor that must be considered carefully when evaluating an assurance case; the developers must have confidence in their case before the system is delivered and the assurance case reviewer, such as a regulatory body, must have adequate confidence in the case before approving the system for use. A necessary aspect of gaining confidence in the assurance case is dealing with uncertainty, which may have several sources. Uncertainty, often impossible to eliminate, nevertheless undermines confidence and must therefore be sufficiently bounded. It can be broadly classified into two types, aleatory (statistical) and epistemic (systematic). This paper surveys how researchers have reasoned about uncertainty in assurance cases. We analyze existing literature to identify the type of uncertainty addressed and distinguish between qualitative and quantitative approaches for dealing with uncertainty.
This work has been partially supported by NSF grants CNS-0931931 and CNS-1035715
A. Ayoub—Currently employed at Mathworks.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Ayoub, A., Chang, J., Sokolsky, O., Lee, I.: Assessing the overall sufficiency of safety arguments. In: Safety-Critical Systems Club (2013)
Ayoub, A., Kim, B.G., Lee, I., Sokolsky, O.: A systematic approach to justifying sufficient confidence in software safety arguments. In: Ortmeier, F., Daniel, P. (eds.) SAFECOMP 2012. LNCS, vol. 7612, pp. 305–316. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-33678-2_26
Bender, M., Maibaum, T., Lawford, M., Wassyng, A.: Positioning verification in the context of software/system certification. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop on Automated Verification of Critical Systems (2011)
Bertolino, A., Strigini, L.: Assessing the risk due to software faults: estimates of failure rate versus evidence of perfection. Softw. Testing Verification Reliab. 8(3), 155–166 (1998)
Bishop, P., Bloomfield, R., Littlewood, B., Povyakalo, A., Wright, D.: Towards a formalism for conservative claims about the dependability of software-based systems. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 37(5), 708–717 (2011)
Bloomfield, R., Bishop, P.: Safety and assurance cases: past, present, and possible future - an adelard perspective. In: Making Systems Safe (2010)
Bloomfield, R.E., Littlewood, B., Wright, D.: Confidence: its role in dependability cases for risk assessment. In: International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks (2007)
Chapman, R.: Safety assurance for embedded software in infusion pumps. In: Presented as a Keynote Talk at FHIES/SEHC (2014)
Cyra, L., G\(\acute{o}\)rski, J.: Supporting expert assessment of argument structures in trust cases. In: 9th International Probability Safety Assessment and Management Conference PSAM (2008)
Denney, E., Pai, G., Habli, I.: Towards measurement of confidence in safety cases. In: 2011 International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (2011)
Goodenough, J.B., Weinstock, C.B., Klein, A.Z.: Toward a theory of assurance case confidence. Technical report, Carnegie Mellon (2012)
Greenwell, W.S., Knight, J.C., Holloway, C.M., Pease, J.J.: A taxonomy of fallacies in system safety arguments. In: International System Safety Conference (2006)
Grigorova, S., Maibaum, T.S.E.: Taking a page from the law books: considering evidence weight in evaluating assurance case confidence. In: Software Reliability Engineering Workshops (2013)
Hawkins, R.D., Kelly, T., Knight, J., Graydon, P.: A new approach to creating clear safety arguments. In: Advances in Systems Safety (2011)
Hawkins, R.D., Kelly, T.P.: Software safety assurance - what is sufficient? In: 4th IET International Conference on Systems Safety (2009)
Jøsang, A., Grandison, T.: Conditional inference in subjective logic. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Information Fusion (2003)
Kelly, T.: Arguing safety-a systematic approach to safety case management. PhD thesis, The University of York (1998)
Kelly, T.: Reviewing assurance arguments - a step-by-step approach. In: Safety Management Requirements for Defence System (2007)
Der Kiureghian, A., Ditlevsen, O.: Aleatory or epistemic? does it matter? J. Struct. Safety 31(2), 105–112 (2008)
Knight, J.: Private e-mail communication (2014)
Leveson, N.: Cost-effective safety certification of software-intensive systems. In: Seventh Software Certification Consortium (2011)
Littlewood, B., Wright, D.: The use of multilegged arguments of increase confdience in safety claims for software-based sytems: a study based on a BBN analysis of an idealized example. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 33(5), 347–365 (2007)
Rodes, B.D., Knight, J.C., Wasson, K.S.: A security metric based on security arguments. In: WETSoM 2014 (2014)
Rushby, J.: Formalism in safety cases. In: Dale, C., Anderson, T. (eds.) Making Systems Safer, pp. 3–17. Springer, London (2010)
Rushby, J.: Logic and epistemology in safety cases. In: Proceedings of SafeComp, p. 32 (2013)
Strigini, L.: Engineering judgement in reliability and safety and its limits: what can we learn from research in psychology. Technical report, Centre for Software Reliability Technical report (1996)
Swiler, L.P., Paez, T.L., Mayes, R.L.: Epistemic uncertainty quantification tutorial. In: Proceedings of the IMAC-XXVII (2009)
Toulmin, S.: The Uses of Argument. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1958)
Weaver, R., Fenn, J., Kelly, T.: A pragmatic approach to reasoning about the assurance of safety arguments. In: 8th Australian Workshop on Safety Critical Systems and Software (SCS 2003) (2003)
Wilkinson, P.: The use of safety cases in certification and regulation by Nancy Leveson a review by Peter Wilkinson. Technical report, US Chemical Safety Board (2014)
Zhao, X., Zhang, D., Lu, M., Zeng, F.: A new approach to assessment of confidence in assurance cases. In: Ortmeier, F., Daniel, P. (eds.) SAFECOMP 2012. LNCS, vol. 7613, pp. 79–91. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-33675-1_7
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Duan, L., Rayadurgam, S., Heimdahl, M.P.E., Ayoub, A., Sokolsky, O., Lee, I. (2017). Reasoning About Confidence and Uncertainty in Assurance Cases: A Survey. In: Huhn, M., Williams, L. (eds) Software Engineering in Health Care. SEHC FHIES 2014 2014. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9062. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63194-3_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63194-3_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-63193-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-63194-3
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)