[SystemSafety] "XYZ Case" Standards

Tue Aug 25 09:49:17 CEST 2015

Not used it, but I saw a draft a long time ago; I kept a note of a particularly useful paragraph that makes an observation on the use of numerical probabilities in assurance arguments:

Applying probability-based analysis can be fraught with difficulties. Reasons for difficulties include: (a) the probabilities required are generally difficult to obtain, and (b) the analysis is sometimes not useful for dealing with very improbable events. However, not using a well-reasoned, quantitative method such as probability can also be fraught with problems - possibly more.

So - it's tricky, then.  This paragraph did not apparently make it to the published version.

John

-----Original Message-----
From: systemsafety-bounces at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de [mailto:systemsafety-bounces at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de] On Behalf Of Peter Bernard Ladkin
Sent: 25 August 2015 07:03
To: The System Safety List
Subject: [SystemSafety] "XYZ Case" Standards

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

I just received a request for my opinion on ISO/IEC 15026, the Assurance Case standard.

There is also a standard which has recently been published in 2015, IEC 62741, Demonstration of Dependability Requirements - The Dependability Case.

Has anyone used either, or has opinions on one or both while not necessarily having used it?

PBL

Prof. Peter Bernard Ladkin, Faculty of Technology, University of Bielefeld, 33594 Bielefeld, Germany Je suis Charlie
Tel+msg +49 (0)521 880 7319  www.rvs.uni-bielefeld.de

***************************************************************************
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify our Help Desk at Email information.solutions at nats.co.uk
immediately. You should not copy or use this email or attachment(s) for any purpose nor disclose
their contents to any other person.

NATS computer systems may be monitored and communications carried on them recorded, to 
secure the effective operation of the system.

Please note that neither NATS nor the sender accepts any responsibility for viruses or any losses
caused as a result of viruses and it is your responsibility to scan or otherwise check this email
and any attachments.

NATS means NATS (En Route) plc (company number: 4129273), NATS (Services) Ltd 
(company number 4129270), NATSNAV Ltd (company number: 4164590) 
or NATS Ltd (company number 3155567) or NATS Holdings Ltd (company number 4138218). 
All companies are registered in England and their registered office is at 4000 Parkway, 
Whiteley, Fareham, Hampshire, PO15 7FL.

***************************************************************************