Engineering topics

Miller, Steven P.

Publications and source records attributed to Miller, Steven P..

13 records

NASA NTRS2014

Formal Methods Case Studies for DO-333

RTCA DO-333, Formal Methods Supplement to DO-178C and DO-278A provides guidance for software developers wishing to use formal methods in the certification of airborne systems and air traffic management systems. The supplement identifies the modifications and additions to DO-178C and DO-278A objectives, activities, and software life cycle data that should be addressed when formal methods are used as part of the software development process. This report presents three case studies describing the use of different classes of formal methods to satisfy certification objectives for a common avionics example - a dual-channel Flight Guidance System. The three case studies illustrate the use of theorem proving, model checking, and abstract interpretation. The material presented is not intended to represent a complete certification effort. Rather, the purpose is to illustrate how formal methods can be used in a realistic avionics software development project, with a focus on the evidence produced that could be used to satisfy the verification objectives found in Section 6 of DO-178C.

Cofer, Darren↗

NASA NTRS2006

Testing Strategies for Model-Based Development

This report presents an approach for testing artifacts generated in a model-based development process. This approach divides the traditional testing process into two parts: requirements-based testing (validation testing) which determines whether the model implements the high-level requirements and model-based testing (conformance testing) which determines whether the code generated from a model is behaviorally equivalent to the model. The goals of the two processes differ significantly and this report explores suitable testing metrics and automation strategies for each. To support requirements-based testing, we define novel objective requirements coverage metrics similar to existing specification and code coverage metrics. For model-based testing, we briefly describe automation strategies and examine the fault-finding capability of different structural coverage metrics using tests automatically generated from the model.

Heimdahl, Mats P. E.↗

NASA NTRS2006

ADGS-2100 Adaptive Display and Guidance System Window Manager Analysis

Recent advances in modeling languages have made it feasible to formally specify and analyze the behavior of large system components. Synchronous data flow languages, such as Lustre, SCR, and RSML-e are particularly well suited to this task, and commercial versions of these tools such as SCADE and Simulink are growing in popularity among designers of safety critical systems, largely due to their ability to automatically generate code from the models. At the same time, advances in formal analysis tools have made it practical to formally verify important properties of these models to ensure that design defects are identified and corrected early in the lifecycle. This report describes how these tools have been applied to the ADGS-2100 Adaptive Display and Guidance Window Manager being developed by Rockwell Collins Inc. This work demonstrates how formal methods can be easily and cost-efficiently used to remove defects early in the design cycle.

Whalen, Mike W.↗

NASA NTRS2006

Model-Based Safety Analysis

System safety analysis techniques are well established and are used extensively during the design of safety-critical systems. Despite this, most of the techniques are highly subjective and dependent on the skill of the practitioner. Since these analyses are usually based on an informal system model, it is unlikely that they will be complete, consistent, and error free. In fact, the lack of precise models of the system architecture and its failure modes often forces the safety analysts to devote much of their effort to gathering architectural details about the system behavior from several sources and embedding this information in the safety artifacts such as the fault trees. This report describes Model-Based Safety Analysis, an approach in which the system and safety engineers share a common system model created using a model-based development process. By extending the system model with a fault model as well as relevant portions of the physical system to be controlled, automated support can be provided for much of the safety analysis. We believe that by using a common model for both system and safety engineering and automating parts of the safety analysis, we can both reduce the cost and improve the quality of the safety analysis. Here we present our vision of model-based safety analysis and discuss the advantages and challenges in making this approach practical.

Joshi, Anjali↗

NASA NTRS2005

A Methodology for the Design and Verification of Globally Asynchronous/Locally Synchronous Architectures

Recent advanced in model-checking have made it practical to formally verify the correctness of many complex synchronous systems (i.e., systems driven by a single clock). However, many computer systems are implemented by asynchronously composing several synchronous components, where each component has its own clock and these clocks are not synchronized. Formal verification of such Globally Asynchronous/Locally Synchronous (GA/LS) architectures is a much more difficult task. In this report, we describe a methodology for developing and reasoning about such systems. This approach allows a developer to start from an ideal system specification and refine it along two axes. Along one axis, the system can be refined one component at a time towards an implementation. Along the other axis, the behavior of the system can be relaxed to produce a more cost effective but still acceptable solution. We illustrate this process by applying it to the synchronization logic of a Dual Fight Guidance System, evolving the system from an ideal case in which the components do not fail and communicate synchronously to one in which the components can fail and communicate asynchronously. For each step, we show how the system requirements have to change if the system is to be implemented and prove that each implementation meets the revised system requirements through modelchecking.

Miller, Steven P.↗

NASA NTRS2004

Software Safety Analysis of a Flight Guidance System

This document summarizes the safety analysis performed on a Flight Guidance System (FGS) requirements model. In particular, the safety properties desired of the FGS model are identified and the presence of the safety properties in the model is formally verified. Chapter 1 provides an introduction to the entire project, while Chapter 2 gives a brief overview of the problem domain, the nature of accidents, model based development, and the four-variable model. Chapter 3 outlines the approach. Chapter 4 presents the results of the traditional safety analysis techniques and illustrates how the hazardous conditions associated with the system trace into specific safety properties. Chapter 5 presents the results of the formal methods analysis technique model checking that was used to verify the presence of the safety properties in the requirements model. Finally, Chapter 6 summarizes the main conclusions of the study, first and foremost that model checking is a very effective verification technique to use on discrete models with reasonable state spaces. Additional supporting details are provided in the appendices.

Butler, Ricky W.↗

NASA NTRS2004

A Formal Methods Approach to the Analysis of Mode Confusion

The goal of the new NASA Aviation Safety Program (AvSP) is to reduce the civil aviation fatal accident rate by 80% in ten years and 90% in twenty years. This program is being driven by the accident data with a focus on the most recent history. Pilot error is the most commonly cited cause for fatal accidents (up to 70%) and obviously must be given major consideration in this program. While the greatest source of pilot error is the loss of situation awareness , mode confusion is increasingly becoming a major contributor as well. The January 30, 1995 issue of Aviation Week lists 184 incidents and accidents involving mode awareness including the Bangalore A320 crash 2/14/90, the Strasbourg A320 crash 1/20/92, the Mulhouse-Habsheim A320 crash 6/26/88, and the Toulouse A330 crash 6/30/94. These incidents and accidents reveal that pilots sometimes become confused about what the cockpit automation is doing. Consequently, human factors research is an obvious investment area. However, even a cursory look at the accident data reveals that the mode confusion problem is much deeper than just training deficiencies and a lack of human-oriented design. This is readily acknowledged by human factors experts. It seems that further progress in human factors must come through a deeper scrutiny of the internals of the automation. It is in this arena that formal methods can contribute. Formal methods refers to the use of techniques from logic and discrete mathematics in the specification, design, and verification of computer systems, both hardware and software. The fundamental goal of formal methods is to capture requirements, designs and implementations in a mathematically based model that can be analyzed in a rigorous manner. Research in formal methods is aimed at automating this analysis as much as possible. By capturing the internal behavior of a flight deck in a rigorous and detailed formal model, the dark corners of a design can be analyzed. This paper will explore how formal models and analyses can be used to help eliminate mode confusion from flight deck designs and at the same time increase our confidence in the safety of the implementation. The paper is based upon interim results from a new project involving NASA Langley and Rockwell Collins in applying formal methods to a realistic business jet Flight Guidance System (FGS).

Butler, Ricky W.↗

NASA NTRS2003

Flight Guidance System Requirements Specification

This report describes a requirements specification written in the RSML-e language for the mode logic of a Flight Guidance System of a typical regional jet aircraft. This model was created as one of the first steps in a five-year project sponsored by the NASA Langley Research Center, Rockwell Collins Inc., and the Critical Systems Research Group of the University of Minnesota to develop new methods and tools to improve the safety of avionics designs. This model will be used to demonstrate the application of a variety of methods and techniques, including safety analysis of system and subsystem requirements, verification of key properties using theorem provers and model checkers, identification of potential sources mode confusion in system designs, partitioning of applications based on the criticality of system hazards, and autogeneration of avionics quality code. While this model is representative of the mode logic of a typical regional jet aircraft, it does not describe an actual or planned product. Several aspects of a full Flight Guidance System, such as recovery from failed sensors, have been omitted, and no claims are made regarding the accuracy or completeness of this specification.

Miller, Steven P.↗

NASA NTRS1999

Formal Verification of the AAMP-FV Microcode

This report describes the experiences of Collins Avionics & Communications and SRI International in formally specifying and verifying the microcode in a Rockwell proprietary microprocessor, the AAMP-FV, using the PVS verification system. This project built extensively on earlier experiences using PVS to verify the microcode in the AAMP5, a complex, pipelined microprocessor designed for use in avionics displays and global positioning systems. While the AAMP5 experiment demonstrated the technical feasibility of formal verification of microcode, the steep learning curve encountered left unanswered the question of whether it could be performed at reasonable cost. The AAMP-FV project was conducted to determine whether the experience gained on the AAMP5 project could be used to make formal verification of microcode cost effective for safety-critical and high volume devices.

Miller, Steven P.↗

NASA NTRS1999

Detecting Mode Confusion Through Formal Modeling and Analysis

Aircraft safety has improved steadily over the last few decades. While much of this improvement can be attributed to the introduction of advanced automation in the cockpit, the growing complexity of these systems also increases the potential for the pilots to become confused about what the automation is doing. This phenomenon, often referred to as mode confusion, has been involved in several accidents involving modern aircraft. This report describes an effort by Rockwell Collins and NASA Langley to identify potential sources of mode confusion through two complementary strategies. The first is to create a clear, executable model of the automation, connect it to a simulation of the flight deck, and use this combination to review of the behavior of the automation and the man-machine interface with the designers, pilots, and experts in human factors. The second strategy is to conduct mathematical analyses of the model by translating it into a formal specification suitable for analysis with automated tools. The approach is illustrated by applying it to a hypothetical, but still realistic, example of the mode logic of a Flight Guidance System.

Miller, Steven P.↗

NASA NTRS1996

A Bitvectors Library for PVS

This paper describes a bitvectors library that has been developed for PVS. The library defines a bitvector as a function from a subrange of the integers into (0,1). The library provides functions that interpret a bitvector as a natural number, as a 2's complement number, as a vector of logical values and as a 2's complement fraction. The library provides a concatenation operator and an extractor. Shift, extend and rotate operations are also, defined. Fundamental properties of each of these operations have been proved in PVS.

Butler, Ricky W.↗

NASA NTRS1995

Formal verification of an avionics microprocessor

Formal specification combined with mechanical verification is a promising approach for achieving the extremely high levels of assurance required of safety-critical digital systems. However, many questions remain regarding their use in practice: Can these techniques scale up to industrial systems, where are they likely to be useful, and how should industry go about incorporating them into practice? This report discusses a project undertaken to answer some of these questions, the formal verification of the AAMPS microprocessor. This project consisted of formally specifying in the PVS language a rockwell proprietary microprocessor at both the instruction-set and register-transfer levels and using the PVS theorem prover to show that the microcode correctly implemented the instruction-level specification for a representative subset of instructions. Notable aspects of this project include the use of a formal specification language by practicing hardware and software engineers, the integration of traditional inspections with formal specifications, and the use of a mechanical theorem prover to verify a portion of a commercial, pipelined microprocessor that was not explicitly designed for formal verification.

Srivas, Mandayam, K.↗

NASA NTRS1995

The AAMP5/AAMP-FV project

This presentation describes a project, formal verification of the microcode in the AAMP5 microprocessor, conducted to explore how formal techniques for specification and verification could be introduced into an industrial process. Sponsored by the Systems Validation Branch of NASA Langley and by Collins Commercial Avionics, a division of Rockwell International, it was conducted by Collins and the SRI International Computer Science Laboratory. The project consisted of specifying in the PVS language developed by SRI a portion of a Rockwell proprietary microprocessor, the AAMP5, at both the instruction set and register-transfer levels and using the PVS theorem prover to prove the microcode correct for a representative subset of instructions. While this presentation includes a brief technical overview, its emphasis is on the lessons learned in using PVS for an example of this size and the implications for using formal methods in an industrial setting. The central result of this project was to demonstrate the feasibility of formally specifying a commercial microprocessor and the use of mechanical proofs of correctness to verify microcode. This is particularly significant since the AAMP5 was not designed for formal verification, but to provide a more than three fold performance improvement, by pipelining instruction execution, while remaining object code compatible with the earlier AAMP2. As a consequence, the AAMP5 is one of the most complex microprocessors to which formal methods have been applied. Another key result was the discovery of both actual and seeded errors. Two actual microcode errors were discovered and corrected during development of the formal specification, illustrating the value of simply creating a precise specification. Two seeded errors were systematically uncovered while doing correctness proofs. One of these was an actual error that had been discovered after first fabrication but left in the microcode provided to SRI. The other error was designed to be unlikely to be detected by walkthroughs, testing, or simulation. Several other results emerged during the project, including the ease with which practicing engineers became comfortable with PVS, the need for libraries of general purpose theories, the usefulness of formal specification in revealing errors, the natural fit between formal specification and inspections, the difficulty of selecting the best style of specification for a new problem domain, the high level of assurance provided by proofs of correctness, and the need to engineer proof strategies for reuse.

Miller, Steven P.↗