D-Case Steps: New Steps for Writing Assurance Cases

  • Yuto Onuma
  • Toshinori Takai
  • Tsutomu Koshiyama
  • Yutaka MatsunoEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11094)


This paper presents D-Case Steps, new steps for writing assurance cases. Although the concept of assurance cases is simple, writing assurance cases is difficult: stating the top goal, selecting strategies for decomposing goals and setting evidence, etc. are all difficult. For this problem, based on conventional writing steps such as the six steps method by Kelly [8], we incorporate stakeholder analysis step and consensus building step. This paper reports two assurance case workshops using D-Case steps, and evaluates the D-Case steps by the results of questionaries done by the participants.


Assurance Case Write Step Stakeholder Analysis Step Method Real Estate Companies 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This work has been supported by KAKENHI 17K12664, MEXT, Japan. We thank the participants of the first D-Case Steps workshop for introducing us the Smart Room Viewing example, and of the second workshop for their feedbacks. Also, we are grateful to DEOS D-Case meeting members for valuable discussions.


  1. 1.
    Adelard: Adelard Safety Case Development Manual. Adelard (1998)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Assurance Case Working Group: Goal structuring notation community standard version 2, January 2018.
  3. 3.
    Dardenne, A., van Lamsweerde, A., Fickas, S.: Goal-directed requirements acquisition. Sci. Comput. Program. 20(1–2), 3–50 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Duan, L., Rayadurgam, S., Heimdahl, M.P.E., Sokolsky, O., Lee, I.: Representation of confidence in assurance cases using the beta distribution. In: 17th IEEE International Symposium on High Assurance Systems Engineering, HASE 2016, Orlando, 7–9 January 2016, pp. 86–93 (2016)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation: Safety case development manual, European Air Traffic Management (2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Goodenough, J.B., Weinstock, C.B., Klein., A.Z.: Toward a theory of assurance case confidence. Technical report, Carnegie Mellon (2012)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Graydon, P.J.: Towards a clearer understanding of context and its role in assurance argument confidence. In: Bondavalli, A., Di Giandomenico, F. (eds.) SAFECOMP 2014. LNCS, vol. 8666, pp. 139–154. Springer, Cham (2014). Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kelly, T.: Arguing safety - a systematic approach to safety case management. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of York (1998)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Matsuno, Y.: D-case communicator: a web based GSN editor for multiple stakeholders. In: Tonetta, S., Schoitsch, E., Bitsch, F. (eds.) SAFECOMP 2017. LNCS, vol. 10489, pp. 64–69. Springer, Cham (2017). Scholar
  10. 10.
    Spriggs, J.: GSN—The Goal Structuring Notation. Springer, London (2012). Scholar
  11. 11.
    Weinstock, C.B.: Assurance cases, December 2008.
  12. 12.
    Yu, E.S.: Social modeling and i*. In: Borgida, A.T., Chaudhri, V.K., Giorgini, P., Yu, E.S. (eds.) Conceptual Modeling: Foundations and Applications. LNCS, vol. 5600, pp. 99–121. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yuto Onuma
    • 1
  • Toshinori Takai
    • 2
  • Tsutomu Koshiyama
    • 1
  • Yutaka Matsuno
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.College of Science and TechnologyNihon UniversityFunabashiJapan
  2. 2.Change Vision, Inc.FukuiJapan

Personalised recommendations