模型驱动的软件构件研制保证水平验证方法
收稿日期: 2014-05-04
修回日期: 2014-09-09
网络出版日期: 2015-03-31
基金资助
国家自然科学基金 (61374145,U1333131);国家"973"计划(2015CB755802,2015CB755805);中国博士后科学基金(201150M1551); 陕西省自然科学基础研究计划项目(2012JQ8010)
Model-driven validation method for software component development assurance level
Received date: 2014-05-04
Revised date: 2014-09-09
Online published: 2015-03-31
Supported by
National Natural Science Foundation of China (61374145, U1333131); National Basic Research Program of China (2015CB755802, 2015CB755805); China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (201150M1551); Natural Science Foundation of Shaanxi Province (2012JQ8010)
在机载软件架构设计阶段,人们将安全性研制保证水平分配到具体的构件中,确保产品质量。鉴于现代航空软件系统极其复杂,如何从系统角度,检验分配给构件的安全性等级符合系统的一致性目标,是设计阶段需要解决的重要问题。首先,分析了分布式和综合式机载软件系统的架构特点,得出了在安全性分析工作中需要考虑冗余等架构设计的影响的结论。其次,使用系统建模语言(SysML)块图建立带有安全性等级属性的系统静态结构模型,利用矩阵对模型进行精确的形式化转换;制定验证规则,在此基础上给出了验证方法,以验证安全性等级分配的合理性。在验证过程中,将关键信息存储在XML文档中,可为适航性审查提供证据。最后,通过实例分析,验证了该方法的可行性。
朱和铨 , 徐浩军 , 张鹏 , 张登成 , 孙曦 . 模型驱动的软件构件研制保证水平验证方法[J]. 航空学报, 2015 , 36(3) : 907 -920 . DOI: 10.7527/S1000-6893.2014.0251
In the airborne software architecture design phase, people assign the safety related development assurance level to specific component to ensure the quality of the product. In view of the modern aviation software system is extremely complex, one of the key problems that how to verifying the safety grade assigned to individual conforms to the goal of the system from the system point of view need to be solved in the design phase. Firstly, this paper analyzes the distributed and integrated architectures characteristic of airborne software system, draw a conclusion that the influence from the redundancy architecture design must be considered in the work of safety analysis. Secondly, the static structure of a system is specified by a system modeling language (SysML) block definition diagram with the description of safety properties. The SysML model is then transformed to formal model using matrix method. Verification rules are set up. Based on the above, a method for checking the rationality of the safety degree assignment is proposed. In the process of verification, the critical information is stored to an XML document to provide evidence for airworthiness review. Finally, the feasibility of this method is verified by an example analysis.
Key words： software safety; verification &; validation; development assurance level; SysML; DO-178B/C
[1] Aven T. Practical implications of the new risk perspectives[J]. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 2013, 115: 136-145.
[2] Chu W K, Zhang F M, Fan X G. Overview on software architecture of integrated modular avionic systems[J]. Acta Aeronautica et Astronautica Sinica. 2009, 30(10): 1912-1917 (in Chinese). 褚文魁, 张凤鸣, 樊晓光. 综合模块化航空电子系统软件体系结构综述[J]. 航空学报, 2009, 30(10): 1912-1917.
[3] Dodd I, Habli I. Safety certification of airborne software: an empirical study[J]. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 2012, 98(1): 7-23.
[4] Zhu H Q, Xu H J, Xue Y, et al. A software safety assessment method based on semi-physical simulation test[J]. Acta Aeronautica et Astronautica Sinica, 2014, 35(6): 1703-1713 (in Chinese). 朱和铨, 徐浩军, 薛源, 等. 一种半实物仿真试验软件安全性分析方法[J]. 航空学报, 2014, 35(6): 1703-1713.
[5] Leveson N G. Software safety: why, what, and how[J]. Computing Surveys, 1986, 18(2): 125-163.
[6] United States Air Force Chief Scientist (AF/ST). Technology horizons: a vision for air force science and technology during 2010-2030[R]. Washington D. C.: Office of the USAF Chief Scientist, 2010.
[7] Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics. DO-178B software considerations in airborne systems and equipment certification[S]. Washington D. C.: Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics, 1992.
[8] Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics. DO-178C software considerations in airborne systems and equipment certification[S]. Washington D. C.: Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics, 2011.
[9] Leveson N G. Applying systems thinking to analyze and learn from events[J]. Safety Science, 2011, 49(1): 55-64.
[10] Kelley K. Automated test case generation from correct and complete system requirements models[C]//2009 IEEE Aerospace Conference. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE, 2009: 1-10.
[11] Bernardi S, Merseguer J, Petriu D C. Adding dependability analysis capabilities to the MARTE profile[C]//Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems. Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2008: 736-750.
[12] Hungar H, Robbe O, Wirtz B. Safe-UML-restricting UML for the development of safety-critical systems[C]//FORMS/FORMAT 2007. 2007: 467-475.
[13] Michael J B, Shing M T, Cruickshank K J, et al. Hazard analysis and validation metrics framework for system of systems software safety [J]. IEEE Systems Journal, 2010, 4(2): 186-197.
[14] Fujiwara T, Estevez J M, Satoh Y, et al. Acalculation method for software safety integrity level[C]//Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Critical Automotive Applications: Robustness and Safety. New York: ACM, 2010: 31-34.
[15] Xu B F, Huang Z Q, Hu J, et al. Model-driven safety dependence verification for component-based airborne software supporting airworthiness certification [J]. Acta Aeronautica et Astronautica Sinica. 2012, 33(5): 796-808 (in Chinese). 徐丙凤, 黄志球, 胡军, 等. 面向适航认证的模型驱动机载软件构件的安全性验证[J]. 航空学报, 2012, 33(5): 796-808 (in Chinese).
[16] Parnas D L. On the criteria to be used in decomposing system into modules[J]. Communications of the ACM, 1972, 15(12): 1053-1058.
[17] Bao P L. Research and implementation of a SysML modeling tool SysModeler [D]. Baotou: Inner Mongolia University, 2008 (in Chinese). 鲍鹏丽. SysModeler: 一个SysML的建模工具的研究与实现[D]. 包头: 内蒙古大学, 2008.
[18] ARP4754. The engineering society for advancing mobility land sea air and space, Certification considerations for highly-integrated of complex aircraft systems[S]. Warrendale: SAE International, 1996.
[19] Cai Y, Zheng Z, Cai K Y, et al. Research on airborne software airworthiness standards DO-178B/C[M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Jiao Tong University Press, 2013: 129-130 (in Chinese). 蔡喁, 郑征, 蔡开元, 等.机载软件适航标准DO-178B/C研究[M]. 上海: 上海交通大学出版社, 2013: 129-130.
[20] Navarro I, Leveson N G, Lunqvist K. Semantic decoupling: reducing the impact of requirement changes[J]. Requirements Engineering, 2010, 15(4): 419-437.
[21] Huang Z Q, Xu B F, Kan S L, et al. Survey on embedded software safety analysis standards, methods and tools for airborne system[J]. Journal of Software, 2014, 25(2): 200-218 (in Chinese). 黄志球, 徐丙凤, 阚双龙, 等. 嵌入式机载软件安全性分析标准、方法及工具研究综述[J]. 软件学报, 2014, 25(2): 200-218.
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |
CJA