Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Software Safety”

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 145 records · Page 8
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2016

Design, Development, and Testing of a UAV Hardware-in-the-Loop Testbed for Aviation and Airspace Prognostics Research

The airspace is becoming more and more complicated, and will continue to do so in the future with the integration of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), autonomy, spacecraft, other forms of aviation technology into the airspace. The new technology and complexity increases the importance and difficulty of safety assurance. Additionally, testing new technologies on complex aviation systems & systems of systems can be very difficult, expensive, and sometimes unsafe in real life scenarios. Prognostic methodology provides an estimate of the health and risks of a component, vehicle, or airspace and knowledge of how that will change over time. That measure is especially useful in safety determination, mission planning, and maintenance scheduling. The developed testbed will be used to validate prediction algorithms for the real-time safety monitoring of the National Airspace System (NAS) and the prediction of unsafe events. The framework injects flight related anomalies related to ground systems, routing, airport congestion, etc. to test and verify algorithms for NAS safety. In our research work, we develop a live, distributed, hardware-in-the-loop testbed for aviation and airspace prognostics along with exploring further research possibilities to verify and validate future algorithms for NAS safety. The testbed integrates virtual aircraft using the X-Plane simulator and X-PlaneConnect toolbox, UAVs using onboard sensors and cellular communications, and hardware in the loop components. In addition, the testbed includes an additional research framework to support and simplify future research activities. It enables safe, accurate, and inexpensive experimentation and research into airspace and vehicle prognosis that would not have been possible otherwise. This paper describes the design, development, and testing of this system. Software reliability, safety and latency are some of the critical design considerations in development of the testbed. Integration of HITL elements in the development phases and veri cation/ validation are key elements to this report.

HITL↗
NASA NTRS2024

Applying Generative-AI to NASA Documentation and Processes

This research and development project leverages generative-AI to assist in the generation of software process documentation based on NASA standards. By utilizing fine-tuned AI models, the proposed system will analyze NASA's software guidelines, helping to translate them into well-structured, compliant process documents. This assistance can reduce the manual effort required to produce such documentation, enhance consistency, and assure alignment with NASA's stringent software development and operational requirements. In addition to assisting in the generation of software process documentation, the project explores how generative-AI can help create audit checklists as well as assess the compliance of NASA provider documentation against applicable NASA standards. This approach would support the compliance auditing process, providing real-time insights and assessments. The intended result will be a streamlined process, potentially including a Python-based tool and database, that improves audit efficiency, reduces human error, lowers manpower costs and required manhours, and assures continuous compliance with NASA and industry evolving standards for safety-critical software development. Future task might be to investigate the software industry approach and standards for potential collaboration.

NASA Standards↗
NASA NTRS2020

NASA Quality Assurance in an MBSE world

Over the past decade or so, the emergence of Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) has demonstrated its desirability and value in terms of 1) being a single source of truth, 2) unambiguous definitions and relationships, and 3) after representation, the ability to explore/extract any sets of data on demand. While much work has been done in showing the value to the system engineering discipline in these areas, how does that value translate to the Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) world? This paper provides a vision of a very desirable future of NASA S&MA after it is fully integrated into the MBSE framework. We explore the impact and consequences of the MBSE Value items discussed above and how they impact the disciplines of quality assurance, reliability and maintainability, system safety, and software assurance. We provide insight into how the MBSE modeling tools can be used to define S&MA processes (ideally as a result of Use Case [1] elaboration of processes represented in MagicDraw®), produce S&MA products (ViewEditor output of various items), and represent S&MA disciplines (S&MA inside of MagicDraw). We also provide insight into the degree to which some elements can be directly integrated into a SysML® model and when, as often happens, an interface to some external source must be provided. The desirability of this future is part of the reason for the NASA Office of Safety and Mission Assurance’s (OSMA) recent creation of a Model Based Mission Assurance (MBMA) Program [2] and the MBMA annual workshops. We briefly summarize the efforts to date to generate S&MA Use Cases for eventual deployment into pilot and project efforts. Even simple use of the SysML modeling tools can be used to capture quality assurance tasks and integrate them with the systems engineering and produce products that are easy to use by quality practitioners that are unfamiliar with these methods. We anticipate finding opportunities to pilot and implement various Quality Assurance (QA) Use Cases in FY20. The MBMA Program is focused on implementation; the NASA Office of the Chief Engineer's Community of Practice, as well as the SmallSat communities, are very interested in the integration of S&MA. Finally, as projects move forward utilizing whatever efficiency increases they can find in a cost-constrained environment, the S&MA community cannot be caught unawares and needs to continue preparing for the ever-growing implementation of MBSE across NASA and our government and commercial partners.

Evans, John W↗
NASA NTRS2017

A Virtual Laboratory for Aviation and Airspace Prognostics Research

Integration of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), autonomy, spacecraft, and other aviation technologies, in the airspace is becoming more and more complicated, and will continue to do so in the future. Inclusion of new technology and complexity into the airspace increases the importance and difficulty of safety assurance. Additionally, testing new technologies on complex aviation systems and systems of systems can be challenging, expensive, and at times unsafe when implementing real life scenarios. The application of prognostics to aviation and airspace management may produce new tools and insight into these problems. Prognostic methodology provides an estimate of the health and risks of a component, vehicle, or airspace and knowledge of how that will change over time. That measure is especially useful in safety determination, mission planning, and maintenance scheduling. In our research, we develop a live, distributed, hardware- in-the-loop Prognostics Virtual Laboratory testbed for aviation and airspace prognostics. The developed testbed will be used to validate prediction algorithms for the real-time safety monitoring of the National Airspace System (NAS) and the prediction of unsafe events. In our earlier work1 we discussed the initial Prognostics Virtual Laboratory testbed development work and related results for milestones 1 & 2. This paper describes the design, development, and testing of the integrated tested which are part of milestone 3, along with our next steps for validation of this work. Through a framework consisting of software/hardware modules and associated interface clients, the distributed testbed enables safe, accurate, and inexpensive experimentation and research into airspace and vehicle prognosis that would not have been possible otherwise. The testbed modules can be used cohesively to construct complex and relevant airspace scenarios for research. Four modules are key to this research: the virtual aircraft module which uses the X-Plane simulator and X-PlaneConnect toolbox, the live aircraft module which connects fielded aircraft using onboard cellular communications devices, the hardware in the loop (HITL) module which connects laboratory based bench-top hardware testbeds and the research module which contains diagnostics and prognostics tools for analysis of live air traffic situations and vehicle health conditions. The testbed also features other modules for data recording and playback, information visualization, and air traffic generation. Software reliability, safety, and latency are some of the critical design considerations in development of the testbed.

LVC-DE↗
NASA NTRS2011

NASA Tech Briefs, January 2011

The topics include: 1) Distributed Aerodynamic Sensing and Processing Toolbox; 2) Collaborative Supervised Learning for Sensor Networks; 3) Hazard Detection Software for Lunar Landing; 4) Onboard Nonlinear Engine Sensor and Component Fault Diagnosis and Isolation Scheme; 5) Network-Capable Application Process and Wireless Intelligent Sensors for ISHM; 6) Interface Supports Multiple Broadcast Transceivers for Flight Applications; 7) FPGA Sequencer for Radar Altimeter Applications; 8) Miniature Sapphire Acoustic Resonator - MSAR; 9) Process-Hardened, Multi-Analyte Sensor for Characterizing Rocket Plume Constituents; 10) SAD5 Stereo Correlation Line-Striping in an FPGA; 11) Hybrid Composite Cryogenic Tank Structure; 12) Nanoscale Deformable Optics; 13) Reliability-Based Design Optimization of a Composite Airframe Component; 14) Zinc Oxide Nanowire Interphase for Enhanced Lightweight Polymer Fiber Composites; 15) Plasma Igniter for Reliable Ignition of Combustion in Rocket Engines; 16) Wire Test Grip Fixture; 17) A Sub-Hertz, Low-Frequency Vibration Isolation Platform; 18) Carbon Nanofibers Synthesized on Selective Substrates for Nonvolatile Memory and 3D Electronics; 19) Nanoparticle/Polymer Nanocomposite Bond Coat or Coating; 20) High-Resolution Wind Measurements for Offshore Wind Energy Development; 21) Spring Tire; 22) Marsviewer 2008; 23) Mission Services Evolution Center Message Bus; 24) Major Constituents Analysis for the Vehicle Cabin Atmosphere Monitor; 25) Astronaut Health Participant Summary Application; 26) Adaption of the AMDIS Method to Flight Status on the VCAM Instrument; 27) Natural Language Interface for Safety Certification of Safety-Critical Software; 28) Cryogenic Caging for Science Instrumentation; 29) Wide-Range Neutron Detector for Space Nuclear Applications; 30) In Situ Guided Wave Structural Health Monitoring System; 31) Multiplexed Energy Coupler for Rotating Equipment; 32) Attitude Estimation in Fractionated Spacecraft Cluster Systems; 33) Full Piezoelectric Multilayer-Stacked Hybrid Actuation/Transduction Systems; 34) Active Flow Effectors for Noise and Separation Control; 35) Method and System for Temporal Filtering in Video Compression Systems; 36) Apparatus for Measuring Total Emissivity of Small, Low-Emissivity Samples; 37) Multiple-Zone Diffractive Optic Element for Laser Ranging Applications; 38) Simplified Architecture for Precise Aiming of a Deep-Space Communication Laser Transceiver; 39) Two-Photon-Absorption Scheme for Optical Beam Tracking; 40) High-Sensitivity, Broad-Range Vacuum Gauge Using Nanotubes for Micromachined Cavities; 41) Wide-Field Optic for Autonomous Acquisition of Laser Link; 42) Extracting Zero-Gravity Surface Figure of a Mirror; 43) Modeling Electromagnetic Scattering From Complex Inhomogeneous Objects; 44) Visual Object Recognition and Tracking of Tools; 45) Method for Implementing Optical Phase Adjustment; 46) Visual SLAM Using Variance Grid Maps; 47) Rapid Calculation of Spacecraft Trajectories Using Efficient Taylor Series Integration; 48) Efficient Kriging Algorithms; 49) Predicting Spacecraft Trajectories by the WeavEncke Method; 50) An Augmentation of G-Guidance Algorithms; 51) Comparison of Aircraft Icing Growth Assessment Software; 52) Silicon-Germanium Voltage-Controlled Oscillator at 105 GHz; 53) Estimation of Coriolis Force and Torque Acting on Ares-1; 54) Null Lens Assembly for X-Ray Mirror Segments; and 55) High-Precision Pulse Generator.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2015

A Vehicle Management End-to-End Testing and Analysis Platform for Validation of Mission and Fault Management Algorithms to Reduce Risk for NASAs Space Launch System

The engineering development of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) new Space Launch System (SLS) requires cross discipline teams with extensive knowledge of launch vehicle subsystems, information theory, and autonomous algorithms dealing with all operations from pre-launch through on orbit operations. The nominal and off-nominal characteristics of SLS's elements and subsystems must be understood and matched with the autonomous algorithm monitoring and mitigation capabilities for accurate control and response to abnormal conditions throughout all vehicle mission flight phases, including precipitating safing actions and crew aborts. This presents a large and complex systems engineering challenge, which is being addressed in part by focusing on the specific subsystems involved in the handling of off-nominal mission and fault tolerance with response management. Using traditional model-based system and software engineering design principles from the Unified Modeling Language (UML) and Systems Modeling Language (SysML), the Mission and Fault Management (M&FM) algorithms for the vehicle are crafted and vetted in Integrated Development Teams (IDTs) composed of multiple development disciplines such as Systems Engineering (SE), Flight Software (FSW), Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) and the major subsystems and vehicle elements such as Main Propulsion Systems (MPS), boosters, avionics, Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC), Thrust Vector Control (TVC), and liquid engines. These model-based algorithms and their development lifecycle from inception through FSW certification are an important focus of SLS's development effort to further ensure reliable detection and response to off-nominal vehicle states during all phases of vehicle operation from pre-launch through end of flight. To test and validate these M&FM algorithms a dedicated test-bed was developed for full Vehicle Management End-to-End Testing (VMET). For addressing fault management (FM) early in the development lifecycle for the SLS program, NASA formed the M&FM team as part of the Integrated Systems Health Management and Automation Branch under the Spacecraft Vehicle Systems Department at the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC). To support the development of the FM algorithms, the VMET developed by the M&FM team provides the ability to integrate the algorithms, perform test cases, and integrate vendor-supplied physics-based launch vehicle (LV) subsystem models. Additionally, the team has developed processes for implementing and validating the M&FM algorithms for concept validation and risk reduction. The flexibility of the VMET capabilities enables thorough testing of the M&FM algorithms by providing configurable suites of both nominal and off-nominal test cases to validate the developed algorithms utilizing actual subsystem models such as MPS, GNC, and others. One of the principal functions of VMET is to validate the M&FM algorithms and substantiate them with performance baselines for each of the target vehicle subsystems in an independent platform exterior to the flight software test and validation processes. In any software development process there is inherent risk in the interpretation and implementation of concepts from requirements and test cases into flight software compounded with potential human errors throughout the development and regression testing lifecycle. Risk reduction is addressed by the M&FM group but in particular by the Analysis Team working with other organizations such as S&MA, Structures and Environments, GNC, Orion, Crew Office, Flight Operations, and Ground Operations by assessing performance of the M&FM algorithms in terms of their ability to reduce Loss of Mission (LOM) and Loss of Crew (LOC) probabilities. In addition, through state machine and diagnostic modeling, analysis efforts investigate a broader suite of failure effects and associated detection and responses to be tested in VMET to ensure reliable failure detection, and confirm responses do not create additional risks or cause undesired states through interactive dynamic effects with other algorithms and systems. VMET further contributes to risk reduction by prototyping and exercising the M&FM algorithms early in their implementation and without any inherent hindrances such as meeting FSW processor scheduling constraints due to their target platform - the ARINC 6535-partitioned Operating System, resource limitations, and other factors related to integration with other subsystems not directly involved with M&FM such as telemetry packing and processing. The baseline plan for use of VMET encompasses testing the original M&FM algorithms coded in the same C++ language and state machine architectural concepts as that used by FSW. This enables the development of performance standards and test cases to characterize the M&FM algorithms and sets a benchmark from which to measure their effectiveness and performance in the exterior FSW development and test processes. This paper is outlined in a systematic fashion analogous to a lifecycle process flow for engineering development of algorithms into software and testing. Section I describes the NASA SLS M&FM context, presenting the current infrastructure, leading principles, methods, and participants. Section II defines the testing philosophy of the M&FM algorithms as related to VMET followed by section III, which presents the modeling methods of the algorithms to be tested and validated in VMET. Its details are then further presented in section IV followed by Section V presenting integration, test status, and state analysis. Finally, section VI addresses the summary and forward directions followed by the appendices presenting relevant information on terminology and documentation.

Trevino, Luis↗
NASA NTRS1976

Flight evaluation of two-segment approaches using area navigation guidance equipment

A two-segment noise abatement approach procedure for use on DC-8-61 aircraft in air carrier service was developed and evaluated. The approach profile and procedures were developed in a flight simulator. Full guidance is provided throughout the approach by a Collins Radio Company three-dimensional area navigation (RNAV) system which was modified to provide the two-segment approach capabilities. Modifications to the basic RNAV software included safety protection logic considered necessary for an operationally acceptable two-segment system. With an aircraft out of revenue service, the system was refined and extensively flight tested, and the profile and procedures were evaluated by representatives of the airlines, airframe manufacturers, the Air Line Pilots Association, and the Federal Aviation Adminstration. The system was determined to be safe and operationally acceptable. It was then placed into scheduled airline service for an evaluation during which 180 approaches were flown by 48 airline pilots. The approach was determined to be compatible with the airline operational environment, although operation of the RNAV system in the existing terminal area air traffic control environment was difficult.

Schwind, G. K.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Modifications to the rapid melt/rapid quench and transparent polymer video furnaces for the KC-135

Given here is a summary of tasks performed on two furnace systems, the Transparent Polymer (TPF) and the Rapid Melt/Rapid Quench (RMRQ) furnaces, to be used aboard NASA's KC-135. It was determined that major changes were needed for both furnaces to operate according to the scientific investigators' experiment parameters. Discussed here are what the problems were, what was required to solve the problems, and possible future enhancements. It was determined that the enhancements would be required for the furnaces to perform at their optimal levels. Services provided include hardware and software modifications, Safety DataPackage documentation, ground based testing, transportation to and from Ellington Air Field, operation of hardware during KC-135 flights, and post-flight data processing.

Smith, Guy A.↗
NASA NTRS1999

Toward Safe Reuse of Product Family Specifications

Upcoming spacecraft plan extensive reuse of software components, to the extent that some systems will form product families of similar or identical units (e.g. a fleet of spaceborne telescopes).

product family software safety product line requir↗
NASA NTRS2007

Survey of Product-line Verification and Validation Techniques

This report presents the results from the first task of the SARP Center Initiative, 'Product Line Verification of Safety-Critical Software.' Task 1 is a literature survey of available techniques for product line verification and validation. Section 1 of the report provides an introduction to product lines and motivates the survey of verification techniques. It describes what is reused in product-line engineering and explains the goal of verifiable conformance of the developed system to its product-line specifications. Section 2 of the report describes six lifecycle steps in product-line verification and validation. This description is based on, and refers to, the best practices extracted from the readings. It ends with a list of verification challenges for NASA product lines (2.7) and verification enablers for NASA product lines (2.8) derived from the survey. Section 3 provides resource lists of related conferences, workshops, industrial and defense industry experiences and case studies of product lines, and academic/industrial consortiums. Section 4 is a bibliography of papers and tutorials with annotated entries for relevant papers not previously discussed in sections 2 or 3.

testing↗
NASA NTRS2010

Range Safety for an Autonomous Flight Safety System

The Range Safety Algorithm software encapsulates the various constructs and algorithms required to accomplish Time Space Position Information (TSPI) data management from multiple tracking sources, autonomous mission mode detection and management, and flight-termination mission rule evaluation. The software evaluates various user-configurable rule sets that govern the qualification of TSPI data sources, provides a prelaunch autonomous hold-launch function, performs the flight-monitoring-and-termination functions, and performs end-of-mission safing

Lanzi, Raymond J.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Health Monitor for Multitasking, Safety-Critical, Real-Time Software

Health Manager can detect Bad Health prior to a failure occurring by periodically monitoring the application software by looking for code corruption errors, and sanity-checking each critical data value prior to use. A processor s memory can fail and corrupt the software, or the software can accidentally write to the wrong address and overwrite the executing software. This innovation will continuously calculate a checksum of the software load to detect corrupted code. This will allow a system to detect a failure before it happens. This innovation monitors each software task (thread) so that if any task reports "bad health," or does not report to the Health Manager, the system is declared bad. The Health Manager reports overall system health to the outside world by outputting a square wave signal. If the square wave stops, this indicates that system health is bad or hung and cannot report. Either way, "bad health" can be detected, whether caused by an error, corrupted data, or a hung processor. A separate Health Monitor Task is started and run periodically in a loop that starts and stops pending on a semaphore. Each monitored task registers with the Health Manager, which maintains a count for the task. The registering task must indicate if it will run more or less often than the Health Manager. If the task runs more often than the Health Manager, the monitored task calls a health function that increments the count and verifies it did not go over max-count. When the periodic Health Manager runs, it verifies that the count did not go over the max-count and zeroes it. If the task runs less often than the Health Manager, the periodic Health Manager will increment the count. The monitored task zeroes the count, and both the Health Manager and monitored task verify that the count did not go over the max-count.

Zoerner, Roger↗
NASA NTRS2011

Reducing Our Ignorance: Finding Answers to Certain Epistemic Questions for Software Systems

In previous papers, we asserted that software system safety is primarily concerned with epistemic questions, that is, questions concerning knowledge and the degree of confidence that can be placed in that knowledge. We also enumerated a set of 21 foundational epistemic questions, discussed some of the difficulties that exist in answering these questions adequately today, and speculated briefly on possible research that may provide improved confidence in the sufficiency of answers in the future. This paper focuses on three of the foundational questions. For each of these questions, current answers are discussed and potential research is proposed to help increase the justifiable level of confidence.

Holloway, C. Michael↗
NASA NTRS2016

Modeling in the State Flow Environment to Support Launch Vehicle Verification Testing for Mission and Fault Management Algorithms in the NASA Space Launch System

Analysis methods and testing processes are essential activities in the engineering development and verification of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) new Space Launch System (SLS). Central to mission success is reliable verification of the Mission and Fault Management (M&FM) algorithms for the SLS launch vehicle (LV) flight software. This is particularly difficult because M&FM algorithms integrate and operate LV subsystems, which consist of diverse forms of hardware and software themselves, with equally diverse integration from the engineering disciplines of LV subsystems. M&FM operation of SLS requires a changing mix of LV automation. During pre-launch the LV is primarily operated by the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Ground Systems Development and Operations (GSDO) organization with some LV automation of time-critical functions, and much more autonomous LV operations during ascent that have crucial interactions with the Orion crew capsule, its astronauts, and with mission controllers at the Johnson Space Center. M&FM algorithms must perform all nominal mission commanding via the flight computer to control LV states from pre-launch through disposal and also address failure conditions by initiating autonomous or commanded aborts (crew capsule escape from the failing LV), redundancy management of failing subsystems and components, and safing actions to reduce or prevent threats to ground systems and crew. To address the criticality of the verification testing of these algorithms, the NASA M&FM team has utilized the State Flow environment6 (SFE) with its existing Vehicle Management End-to-End Testbed (VMET) platform which also hosts vendor-supplied physics-based LV subsystem models. The human-derived M&FM algorithms are designed and vetted in Integrated Development Teams composed of design and development disciplines such as Systems Engineering, Flight Software (FSW), Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) and major subsystems and vehicle elements such as Main Propulsion Systems (MPS), boosters, avionics, Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GN&C), Thrust Vector Control (TVC), liquid engines, and the astronaut crew office. Since the algorithms are realized using model-based engineering (MBE) methods from a hybrid of the Unified Modeling Language (UML) and Systems Modeling Language (SysML), SFE methods are a natural fit to provide an in depth analysis of the interactive behavior of these algorithms with the SLS LV subsystem models. For this, the M&FM algorithms and the SLS LV subsystem models are modeled using constructs provided by Matlab which also enables modeling of the accompanying interfaces providing greater flexibility for integrated testing and analysis, which helps forecast expected behavior in forward VMET integrated testing activities. In VMET, the M&FM algorithms are prototyped and implemented using the same C++ programming language and similar state machine architectural concepts used by the FSW group. Due to the interactive complexity of the algorithms, VMET testing thus far has verified all the individual M&FM subsystem algorithms with select subsystem vendor models but is steadily progressing to assessing the interactive behavior of these algorithms with LV subsystems, as represented by subsystem models. The novel SFE applications has proven to be useful for quick look analysis into early integrated system behavior and assessment of the M&FM algorithms with the modeled LV subsystems. This early MBE analysis generates vital insight into the integrated system behaviors, algorithm sensitivities, design issues, and has aided in the debugging of the M&FM algorithms well before full testing can begin in more expensive, higher fidelity but more arduous environments such as VMET, FSW testing, and the Systems Integration Lab7 (SIL). SFE has exhibited both expected and unexpected behaviors in nominal and off nominal test cases prior to full VMET testing. In many findings, these behavioral characteristics were used to correct the M&FM algorithms, enable better test coverage, and develop more effective test cases for each of the LV subsystems. This has improved the fidelity of testing and planning for the next generation of M&FM algorithms as the SLS program evolves from non-crewed to crewed flight, impacting subsystem configurations and the M&FM algorithms that control them. SFE analysis has improved robustness and reliability of the M&FM algorithms by revealing implementation errors and documentation inconsistencies. It is also improving planning efficiency for future VMET testing of the M&FM algorithms hosted in the LV flight computers, further reducing risk for the SLS launch infrastructure, the SLS LV, and most importantly the crew.

Trevino, Luis↗
NASA NTRS2020

NASA quality assurance in an MBSE world

We explore the impact and consequences of the MBSE Value items discussed above and how they impact the disciplines of quality assurance, reliability and maintainability, system safety, and software assurance. We provide insight into how the MBSE modeling tools can be used to define S&MA processes (ideally as a result of Use Case [1] elaboration of processes represented in MagicDraw®), produce S&MA products (ViewEditor output of various items), and represent S&MA disciplines (S&MA inside of MagicDraw). We also provide insight into the degree to which some elements can be directly integrated into a SysML® model and when, as often happens, an interface to some external source must be provided.

Evans, John W.↗
NASA NTRS2006

Autonomy Software: V&V Challenges and Characteristics

The successful operation of unmanned air vehicles requires software with a high degree of autonomy. Only if high level functions can be carried out without human control and intervention, complex missions in a changing and potentially unknown environment can be carried out successfully. Autonomy software is highly mission and safety critical: failures, caused by flaws in the software cannot only jeopardize the mission, but could also endanger human life (e.g., a crash of an UAV in a densely populated area). Due to its large size, high complexity, and use of specialized algorithms (planner, constraint-solver, etc.), autonomy software poses specific challenges for its verification, validation, and certification. -- - we have carried out a survey among researchers aid scientists at NASA to study these issues. In this paper, we will present major results of this study, discussing the broad spectrum. of notions and characteristics of autonomy software and its challenges for design and development. A main focus of this survey was to evaluate verification and validation (V&V) issues and challenges, compared to the development of "traditional" safety-critical software. We will discuss important issues in V&V of autonomous software and advanced V&V tools which can help to mitigate software risks. Results of this survey will help to identify and understand safety concerns in autonomy software and will lead to improved strategies for mitigation of these risks.

Schumann, Johann↗
NASA NTRS2009

Proceedings of the Third International Workshop on Proof-Carrying Code and Software Certification

This NASA conference publication contains the proceedings of the Third International Workshop on Proof-Carrying Code and Software Certification, held as part of LICS in Los Angeles, CA, USA, on August 15, 2009. Software certification demonstrates the reliability, safety, or security of software systems in such a way that it can be checked by an independent authority with minimal trust in the techniques and tools used in the certification process itself. It can build on existing validation and verification (V&V) techniques but introduces the notion of explicit software certificates, Vvilich contain all the information necessary for an independent assessment of the demonstrated properties. One such example is proof-carrying code (PCC) which is an important and distinctive approach to enhancing trust in programs. It provides a practical framework for independent assurance of program behavior; especially where source code is not available, or the code author and user are unknown to each other. The workshop wiII address theoretical foundations of logic-based software certification as well as practical examples and work on alternative application domains. Here "certificate" is construed broadly, to include not just mathematical derivations and proofs but also safety and assurance cases, or any fonnal evidence that supports the semantic analysis of programs: that is, evidence about an intrinsic property of code and its behaviour that can be independently checked by any user, intermediary, or third party. These guarantees mean that software certificates raise trust in the code itself, distinct from and complementary to any existing trust in the creator of the code, the process used to produce it, or its distributor. In addition to the contributed talks, the workshop featured two invited talks, by Kelly Hayhurst and Andrew Appel. The PCC 2009 website can be found at http://ti.arc.nasa.gov /event/pcc 091.

Ewen, Denney, W.↗