Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Software Certification”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 73 records · Page 4
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1990

Software verification plan for GCS

This verification plan is written as part of an experiment designed to study the fundamental characteristics of the software failure process. The experiment will be conducted using several implementations of software that were produced according to industry-standard guidelines, namely the Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics RTCA/DO-178A guidelines, Software Consideration in Airborne Systems and Equipment Certification, for the development of flight software. This plan fulfills the DO-178A requirements for providing instructions on the testing of each implementation of software. The plan details the verification activities to be performed at each phase in the development process, contains a step by step description of the testing procedures, and discusses all of the tools used throughout the verification process.

Dent, Leslie A.↗
NASA NTRS1993

Certification trails for data structures

Certification trails are a recently introduced and promising approach to fault detection and fault tolerance. The applicability of the certification trail technique is significantly generalized. Previously, certification trails had to be customized to each algorithm application; trails appropriate to wide classes of algorithms were developed. These certification trails are based on common data-structure operations such as those carried out using these sets of operations such as those carried out using balanced binary trees and heaps. Any algorithms using these sets of operations can therefore employ the certification trail method to achieve software fault tolerance. To exemplify the scope of the generalization of the certification trail technique provided, constructions of trails for abstract data types such as priority queues and union-find structures are given. These trails are applicable to any data-structure implementation of the abstract data type. It is also shown that these ideals lead naturally to monitors for data-structure operations.

Sullivan, Gregory F.↗
NASA NTRS1987

Experiments in fault tolerant software reliability

The reliability of voting was evaluated in a fault-tolerant software system for small output spaces. The effectiveness of the back-to-back testing process was investigated. Version 3.0 of the RSDIMU-ATS, a semi-automated test bed for certification testing of RSDIMU software, was prepared and distributed. Software reliability estimation methods based on non-random sampling are being studied. The investigation of existing fault-tolerance models was continued and formulation of new models was initiated.

Mcallister, David F.↗
NASA NTRS2002

Modular Certification

Airplanes are certified as a whole: there is no established basis for separately certifying some components, particularly software-intensive ones, independently of their specific application in a given airplane. The absence of separate certification inhibits the development of modular components that could be largely "precertified" and used in several different contexts within a single airplane, or across many different airplanes. In this report, we examine the issues in modular certification of software components and propose an approach based on assume-guarantee reasoning. We extend the method from verification to certification by considering behavior in the presence of failures. This exposes the need for partitioning, and separation of assumptions and guarantees into normal and abnormal cases. We then identify three classes of property that must be verified within this framework: safe function, true guarantees, and controlled failure. We identify a particular assume-guarantee proof rule (due to McMillan) that is appropriate to the applications considered, and formally verify its soundness in PVS.

Rushby, John↗
NASA NTRS2005

Visions of Automation and Realities of Certification

Quite a lot of people envision automation as the solution to many of the problems in aviation and air transportation today, across all sectors: commercial, private, and military. This paper explains why some recent experiences with complex, highly-integrated, automated systems suggest that this vision will not be realized unless significant progress is made over the current state-of-the-practice in software system development and certification.

Hayhurst, Kelly J.↗
NASA NTRS2004

A Tool for Verification and Validation of Neural Network Based Adaptive Controllers for High Assurance Systems

High reliability of mission- and safety-critical software systems has been identified by NASA as a high-priority technology challenge. We present an approach for the performance analysis of a neural network (NN) in an advanced adaptive control system. This problem is important in the context of safety-critical applications that require certification, such as flight software in aircraft. We have developed a tool to measure the performance of the NN during operation by calculating a confidence interval (error bar) around the NN's output. Our tool can be used during pre-deployment verification as well as monitoring the network performance during operation. The tool has been implemented in Simulink and simulation results on a F-15 aircraft are presented.

Gupta, Pramod↗
NASA NTRS2000

Software Released by LEWICE 2.0 Ice Accretion Software Development Project

Computational icing simulation methods are making the transition from the realm of research to commonplace use in design and certification. As such, standards of software management, design, validation, and documentation must be adjusted to accommodate the increased expectations of the user community with respect to accuracy, reliability, capability, and usability. With this in mind, in collaboration with Glenn's Engineering Design and Analysis Division, the Icing Branch of the NASA Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field began a software improvement project focused on the two-dimensional ice accretion simulation tool LEWICE. This project is serving as an introduction to the concepts of software management and is intended to serve as a pilot project for future icing simulation code development. The LEWICE 2.0 Software Development Project consisted of two major elements: software management and software validation. The software management element consisted of identifying features of well-designed and well-managed software that are appropriate for an analytical prediction tool such as LEWICE and applying them to a revised version of the code. This element included tasks such as identification of software requirements, development and implementation of coding standards, and implementation of software revision control practices. With the application of these techniques, the LEWICE ice accretion code became a more stable and reliable software product. In addition, the lessons learned about software development and maintenance can be factored into future software projects at the outset. The software validation activity was an integral part of our effort to make LEWICE a more accurate and reliable analysis tool. Because of the efforts taken to extensively validate this software, LEWICE 2.0 is more robust than previous releases and can reproduce results accurately across several computing platforms. It also differs from previous versions in the extensive quantitative comparisons of its results with a data base of ice shapes that were generated in Glenn's Icing Research Tunnel. The results of the shape comparisons were analyzed to determine the range of meteorological conditions under which LEWICE 2.0 is within the repeatability found for ice shapes obtained from experiments. These comparisons show that the average variation of LEWICE 2.0 from experimental data is 7.2 percent, whereas the overall variability of the experimental data is 2.5 percent. The LEWICE 2.0 Software Development Project resulted in the release, at the recent Icing Branch LEWICE Workshop, of a more useful and robust analysis tool than was previously available to the icing community. The lessons learned from this project will be applied to the Icing Branch s future software development efforts.

Potapczuk, Mark G.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Application of industry-standard guidelines for the validation of avionics software

The application of industry standards to the development of avionics software is discussed, focusing on verification and validation activities. It is pointed out that the procedures that guide the avionics software development and testing process are under increased scrutiny. The DO-178A guidelines, Software Considerations in Airborne Systems and Equipment Certification, are used by the FAA for certifying avionics software. To investigate the effectiveness of the DO-178A guidelines for improving the quality of avionics software, guidance and control software (GCS) is being developed according to the DO-178A development method. It is noted that, due to the extent of the data collection and configuration management procedures, any phase in the life cycle of a GCS implementation can be reconstructed. Hence, a fundamental development and testing platform has been established that is suitable for investigating the adequacy of various software development processes. In particular, the overall effectiveness and efficiency of the development method recommended by the DO-178A guidelines are being closely examined.

Hayhurst, Kelly J.↗
NASA NTRS1990

ACES: Space shuttle flight software analysis expert system

The Analysis Criteria Evaluation System (ACES) is a knowledge based expert system that automates the final certification of the Space Shuttle onboard flight software. Guidance, navigation and control of the Space Shuttle through all its flight phases are accomplished by a complex onboard flight software system. This software is reconfigured for each flight to allow thousands of mission-specific parameters to be introduced and must therefore be thoroughly certified prior to each flight. This certification is performed in ground simulations by executing the software in the flight computers. Flight trajectories from liftoff to landing, including abort scenarios, are simulated and the results are stored for analysis. The current methodology of performing this analysis is repetitive and requires many man-hours. The ultimate goals of ACES are to capture the knowledge of the current experts and improve the quality and reduce the manpower required to certify the Space Shuttle onboard flight software.

Satterwhite, R. Scott↗
NASA NTRS2006

Case Study: Test Results of a Tool and Method for In-Flight, Adaptive Control System Verification on a NASA F-15 Flight Research Aircraft

Adaptive control technologies that incorporate learning algorithms have been proposed to enable autonomous flight control and to maintain vehicle performance in the face of unknown, changing, or poorly defined operating environments [1-2]. At the present time, however, it is unknown how adaptive algorithms can be routinely verified, validated, and certified for use in safety-critical applications. Rigorous methods for adaptive software verification end validation must be developed to ensure that. the control software functions as required and is highly safe and reliable. A large gap appears to exist between the point at which control system designers feel the verification process is complete, and when FAA certification officials agree it is complete. Certification of adaptive flight control software verification is complicated by the use of learning algorithms (e.g., neural networks) and degrees of system non-determinism. Of course, analytical efforts must be made in the verification process to place guarantees on learning algorithm stability, rate of convergence, and convergence accuracy. However, to satisfy FAA certification requirements, it must be demonstrated that the adaptive flight control system is also able to fail and still allow the aircraft to be flown safely or to land, while at the same time providing a means of crew notification of the (impending) failure. It was for this purpose that the NASA Ames Confidence Tool was developed [3]. This paper presents the Confidence Tool as a means of providing in-flight software assurance monitoring of an adaptive flight control system. The paper will present the data obtained from flight testing the tool on a specially modified F-15 aircraft designed to simulate loss of flight control faces.

Jacklin, Stephen A.↗
NASA NTRS1992

An improved approach for flight readiness certification: Methodology for failure risk assessment and application examples. Volume 2: Software documentation

An improved methodology for quantitatively evaluating failure risk of spaceflight systems to assess flight readiness and identify risk control measures is presented. This methodology, called Probabilistic Failure Assessment (PFA), combines operating experience from tests and flights with engineering analysis to estimate failure risk. The PFA methodology is of particular value when information on which to base an assessment of failure risk, including test experience and knowledge of parameters used in engineering analyses of failure phenomena, is expensive or difficult to acquire. The PFA methodology is a prescribed statistical structure in which engineering analysis models that characterize failure phenomena are used conjointly with uncertainties about analysis parameters and/or modeling accuracy to estimate failure probability distributions for specific failure modes, These distributions can then be modified, by means of statistical procedures of the PFA methodology, to reflect any test or flight experience. Conventional engineering analysis models currently employed for design of failure prediction are used in this methodology. The PFA methodology is described and examples of its application are presented. Conventional approaches to failure risk evaluation for spaceflight systems are discussed, and the rationale for the approach taken in the PFA methodology is presented. The statistical methods, engineering models, and computer software used in fatigue failure mode applications are thoroughly documented.

Moore, N. R.↗
NASA NTRS2001

Coverage Metrics for Model Checking

When using model checking to verify programs in practice, it is not usually possible to achieve complete coverage of the system. In this position paper we describe ongoing research within the Automated Software Engineering group at NASA Ames on the use of test coverage metrics to measure partial coverage and provide heuristic guidance for program model checking. We are specifically interested in applying and developing coverage metrics for concurrent programs that might be used to support certification of next generation avionics software.

Penix, John↗
NASA NTRS2016

Safety Characteristics in System Application of Software for Human Rated Exploration Missions for the 8th IAASS Conference

NASA and its industry and international partners are embarking on a bold and inspiring development effort to design and build an exploration class space system. The space system is made up of the Orion system, the Space Launch System (SLS) and the Ground Systems Development and Operations (GSDO) system. All are highly coupled together and dependent on each other for the combined safety of the space system. A key area of system safety focus needs to be in the ground and flight application software system (GFAS). In the development, certification and operations of GFAS, there are a series of safety characteristics that define the approach to ensure mission success. This paper will explore and examine the safety characteristics of the GFAS development. The GFAS system integrates the flight software packages of the Orion and SLS with the ground systems and launch countdown sequencers through the 'agile' software development process. A unique approach is needed to develop the GFAS project capabilities within this agile process. NASA has defined the software development process through a set of standards. The standards were written during the infancy of the so-called industry 'agile development' movement and must be tailored to adapt to the highly integrated environment of human exploration systems. Safety of the space systems and the eventual crew on board is paramount during the preparation of the exploration flight systems. A series of software safety characteristics have been incorporated into the development and certification efforts to ensure readiness for use and compatibility with the space systems. Three underlining factors in the exploration architecture require the GFAS system to be unique in its approach to ensure safety for the space systems, both the flight as well as the ground systems. The first are the missions themselves, which are exploration in nature, and go far beyond the comfort of low Earth orbit operations. The second is the current exploration system will launch only one mission per year even less during its developmental phases. Finally, the third is the partnered approach through the use of many different prime contractors, including commercial and international partners, to design and build the exploration systems. These three factors make the challenges to meet the mission preparations and the safety expectations extremely difficult to implement. As NASA leads a team of partners in the exploration beyond earth's influence, it is a safety imperative that the application software used to test, checkout, prepare and launch the exploration systems put safety of the hardware and mission first. Software safety characteristics are built into the design and development process to enable the human rated systems to begin their missions safely and successfully. Exploration missions beyond Earth are inherently risky, however, with solid safety approaches in both hardware and software, the boldness of these missions can be realized for all on the home planet.

capability↗
NASA NTRS2008

Guidance and Control Software Project Data - Volume 2: Development Documents

The Guidance and Control Software (GCS) project was the last in a series of software reliability studies conducted at Langley Research Center between 1977 and 1994. The technical results of the GCS project were recorded after the experiment was completed. Some of the support documentation produced as part of the experiment, however, is serving an unexpected role far beyond its original project context. Some of the software used as part of the GCS project was developed to conform to the RTCA/DO-178B software standard, "Software Considerations in Airborne Systems and Equipment Certification," used in the civil aviation industry. That standard requires extensive documentation throughout the software development life cycle, including plans, software requirements, design and source code, verification cases and results, and configuration management and quality control data. The project documentation that includes this information is open for public scrutiny without the legal or safety implications associated with comparable data from an avionics manufacturer. This public availability has afforded an opportunity to use the GCS project documents for DO-178B training. This report provides a brief overview of the GCS project, describes the 4-volume set of documents and the role they are playing in training, and includes the development documents from the GCS project. Volume 2 contains three appendices: A. Guidance and Control Software Development Specification; B. Design Description for the Pluto Implementation of the Guidance and Control Software; and C. Source Code for the Pluto Implementation of the Guidance and Control Software

Hayhurst, Kelly J.↗
NASA NTRS2008

Guidance and Control Software Project Data - Volume 3: Verification Documents

The Guidance and Control Software (GCS) project was the last in a series of software reliability studies conducted at Langley Research Center between 1977 and 1994. The technical results of the GCS project were recorded after the experiment was completed. Some of the support documentation produced as part of the experiment, however, is serving an unexpected role far beyond its original project context. Some of the software used as part of the GCS project was developed to conform to the RTCA/DO-178B software standard, "Software Considerations in Airborne Systems and Equipment Certification," used in the civil aviation industry. That standard requires extensive documentation throughout the software development life cycle, including plans, software requirements, design and source code, verification cases and results, and configuration management and quality control data. The project documentation that includes this information is open for public scrutiny without the legal or safety implications associated with comparable data from an avionics manufacturer. This public availability has afforded an opportunity to use the GCS project documents for DO-178B training. This report provides a brief overview of the GCS project, describes the 4-volume set of documents and the role they are playing in training, and includes the verification documents from the GCS project. Volume 3 contains four appendices: A. Software Verification Cases and Procedures for the Guidance and Control Software Project; B. Software Verification Results for the Pluto Implementation of the Guidance and Control Software; C. Review Records for the Pluto Implementation of the Guidance and Control Software; and D. Test Results Logs for the Pluto Implementation of the Guidance and Control Software.

Hayhurst, Kelly J.↗
NASA NTRS2008

Guidance and Control Software Project Data - Volume 4: Configuration Management and Quality Assurance Documents

The Guidance and Control Software (GCS) project was the last in a series of software reliability studies conducted at Langley Research Center between 1977 and 1994. The technical results of the GCS project were recorded after the experiment was completed. Some of the support documentation produced as part of the experiment, however, is serving an unexpected role far beyond its original project context. Some of the software used as part of the GCS project was developed to conform to the RTCA/DO-178B software standard, "Software Considerations in Airborne Systems and Equipment Certification," used in the civil aviation industry. That standard requires extensive documentation throughout the software development life cycle, including plans, software requirements, design and source code, verification cases and results, and configuration management and quality control data. The project documentation that includes this information is open for public scrutiny without the legal or safety implications associated with comparable data from an avionics manufacturer. This public availability has afforded an opportunity to use the GCS project documents for DO-178B training. This report provides a brief overview of the GCS project, describes the 4-volume set of documents and the role they are playing in training, and includes configuration management and quality assurance documents from the GCS project. Volume 4 contains six appendices: A. Software Accomplishment Summary for the Guidance and Control Software Project; B. Software Configuration Index for the Guidance and Control Software Project; C. Configuration Management Records for the Guidance and Control Software Project; D. Software Quality Assurance Records for the Guidance and Control Software Project; E. Problem Report for the Pluto Implementation of the Guidance and Control Software Project; and F. Support Documentation Change Reports for the Guidance and Control Software Project.

Hayhurst, Kelly J.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Certification Concepts for AI/ML Systems

This presentation goes over some of the tools developed at NASA Ames in the Robust Software Engineering group for the assurance and certification of autonomous systems. The research themes presented include improving safety and risk assessment as early as possible in the lifecycle, elicitation and formalization of requirements to facilitate traceability throughout the lifecycle, especially when formal methods are used, algorithms, tools and techniques for the V&V of ML-enabled systems, advanced testing, use of runtime monitoring to ease use of untrusted components, and contribution to draft regulatory standards and assistance in producing and presenting certification evidences.

Autonomy↗
NASA NTRS2007

The Dangers of Failure Masking in Fault-Tolerant Software: Aspects of a Recent In-Flight Upset Event

On 1 August 2005, a Boeing Company 777-200 aircraft, operating on an international passenger flight from Australia to Malaysia, was involved in a significant upset event while flying on autopilot. The Australian Transport Safety Bureau's investigation into the event discovered that an anomaly existed in the component software hierarchy that allowed inputs from a known faulty accelerometer to be processed by the air data inertial reference unit (ADIRU) and used by the primary flight computer, autopilot and other aircraft systems. This anomaly had existed in original ADIRU software, and had not been detected in the testing and certification process for the unit. This paper describes the software aspects of the incident in detail, and suggests possible implications concerning complex, safety-critical, fault-tolerant software.

Johnson, C. W.↗