<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Verdana;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:inherit;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;
mso-fareast-language:FR;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:70.85pt 70.85pt 70.85pt 70.85pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="FR" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US">Hi all,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US">The statistical evidence at the system level is valid, for the random hardware failures. There are systematic hardware failures and systematic software failures that cannot be caught
by the random approach. Ariane A501 flight has disproved any probabilistic approach on software that would not start with a frequency of failure of 1. Also disproving the rather quaint notion of “reuse of proven equipment” without taking into account the operational
profile.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US">Software is not the only part of the system with systematic failures, hardware has it too (see valve failure on the british nuclear submarines). However Software is the only part of
a system that doesn’t have random failures, those come all from the hardware.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US">Best regards,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:10.0pt;line-height:14.0pt;background:white">
<b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:inherit;color:#003591;border:none windowtext 1.0pt;padding:0cm">Thierry Coq</span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="mso-fareast-language:EN-US">The opinions expressed here are my own.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US">From:</span></b><span lang="EN-US"> systemsafety <systemsafety-bounces@lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Nick Tudor<br>
<b>Sent:</b> mardi 15 septembre 2020 11:01<br>
<b>To:</b> Peter Bishop <pgb@adelard.com><br>
<b>Cc:</b> The System Safety List <systemsafety@lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [SystemSafety] What do we know about software reliability?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Peter wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">"And statistical testing is used in the UK nuclear industry fore safety critical systems,"<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">This is true, but note that the statement is safety critical 'systems'; not 'software'. While the UK standards do talk about 'on demand' and some numbers, it is actually focussed at the system level, not the software.
There is (at last) a distinct but still tacit acceptance that it is a nonsense to accept software has a 'reliability' and hence to be treated in the same way that hardware fails. It is much better to give a reason why the software should be trusted rather
than rely (!) on some outdated research for which the foundations are highly questionable. This is now gaining acceptance rather than a statistical approach. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">As I recall, I have said before on this list, software has no wear out mechanism so software reliability is somewhat meaningless. I was widely abused (some even said bullied) for suggesting that software reliability
was not the right way of thinking about software assurance. It is therefore with some trepidation that I dive into this thread. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Nick Tudor<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Tudor Associates Ltd<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Mobile: +44(0)7412 074654<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tudorassoc.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cthierry.coq%40dnvgl.com%7C1fbb8cb48c2f497ae54f08d85955db17%7Cadf10e2bb6e941d6be2fc12bb566019c%7C1%7C0%7C637357572581380089&sdata=rr8ZhN1xyoXnhFnpwDuALhCUbE5h%2FW4VKLUSvPMdv0E%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank">www.tudorassoc.com</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><img border="0" width="200" height="40" style="width:2.0849in;height:.415in" id="_x0000_i1028" src="http://www.tudorassoc.com/wpimages/wpb4e71a5c_0f.jpg"><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#00144D">77 Barnards Green Road</span></b><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#00144D">Malvern</span></b><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#00144D">Worcestershire</span></b><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#00144D">WR14 3LR<br>
<strong><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">Company No. 07642673</span></strong></span></b><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#00144D">VAT No:116495996</span></strong><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#00144D"><a href="https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aeronautique-associates.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cthierry.coq%40dnvgl.com%7C1fbb8cb48c2f497ae54f08d85955db17%7Cadf10e2bb6e941d6be2fc12bb566019c%7C1%7C0%7C637357572581380089&sdata=o1LqRtL6KbozBzhTQkiGj011G%2BzNP6AVeLLex3Vfhg0%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank"><span lang="EN-US">www.aeronautique-associates.com</span></a></span></strong>
<span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">On Tue, 15 Sep 2020 at 09:46, Peter Bishop <</span><a href="mailto:pgb@adelard.com"><span lang="EN-US">pgb@adelard.com</span></a><span lang="EN-US">> wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">On 14/09/2020 15:04, Martyn Thomas wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p><span lang="EN-US">Why are you completely dismissing software reliablity? <o:p>
</o:p></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US">Is it not the case that if you can tolerate a failure rate of once in 1000 hours, 99% confidence through testing would take about 200 days to demonstrate (so long as the test environment is "sufficiently" like the future operating environment
and you are able to detaect every failure correctly)? <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</blockquote>
<p><span lang="EN-US">And statistical testing is used in the UK nuclear industry fore safety critical systems, so it is not just abstract theory,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US">Re your characterisation of confidence based statistical testing on P153 (with no reference), I do not think it is fair to dismiss this because "p can vary by orders of magnitude". Testing presumes a fixed operational profile and a constant
probability of failure. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US">There has also been some work on the impact of profile change on the bound that can be claimed.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><a href="https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Fpublication%2F307555914_Deriving_a_frequentist_conservative_confidence_bound_for_probability_of_failure_per_demand_for_systems_with_different_operational_and_test_profiles&data=02%7C01%7Cthierry.coq%40dnvgl.com%7C1fbb8cb48c2f497ae54f08d85955db17%7Cadf10e2bb6e941d6be2fc12bb566019c%7C1%7C0%7C637357572581390077&sdata=4gqsrw75JYaLBmJJjIgOFSCfICnXQHzyZgoMqEhoPus%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank"><span lang="EN-US">https://www.researchgate.net/publication/307555914_Deriving_a_frequentist_conservative_confidence_bound_for_probability_of_failure_per_demand_for_systems_with_different_operational_and_test_profiles</span></a><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US">BTW, re, your summary of my paper on the same page, I think you missed the main point. This is a<b> predictive</b> theory to derive a worst case bound for some time in the future, i.e.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US">Given N faults what is the worst possible reliability at some future time T?<br>
- it assumes fault fixing will occur during that time.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US">You also only presented the theory of N=1, and you seem to assume the T has already happened with zero failures (not a requirement for this model)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US">Might have been better to reference the original worst case bound version (which makes it clear that it is a long term forward prediction)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><a href="https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Fpublication%2F3152200_A_conservative_theory_for_long-term_reliability-growth_prediction&data=02%7C01%7Cthierry.coq%40dnvgl.com%7C1fbb8cb48c2f497ae54f08d85955db17%7Cadf10e2bb6e941d6be2fc12bb566019c%7C1%7C0%7C637357572581390077&sdata=gFp342%2B%2F%2Fj2Cu%2BgMPjXN7CNG9J8%2F6B6ZtIPNi7W8zhs%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank"><span lang="EN-US">https://www.researchgate.net/publication/3152200_A_conservative_theory_for_long-term_reliability-growth_prediction</span></a><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p><span lang="EN-US">Of course, the testing would have to be repeated following a change to the software, unless you have enough formality to show that the change cannot affect reliability.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US">In specific circumstances, you can do better than this. Bev Littlewood's published papers provide strong evidence and a rich bibliography. Bev's paper on "How reliable is a program that has never failed?" offers a useful rule-of-thumb:
that aften n hours of fault free operation, there is about 50% chance of a failure in the following n hours (subject to some obvious constraints).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US">The difficulties rapidly escalate when you need 10^-4 or better at >90% confidence.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US">Martyn<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">On 14/09/2020 14:14, SPRIGGS, John J wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:6.0pt;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">In my experience, if Software Reliability is mentioned at a conference, at least one member of the audience will laugh, and if it is mentioned in a work discussion,
at least one member of the group will get angry.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:6.0pt;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">Interestingly, some of the same people who say it is impossible to quantify software failure rates will set numerical requirements for Software Availability – if you
get one of those, ask the Customer how (s)he wants you to demonstrate satisfaction of the requirement.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:6.0pt;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:6.0pt;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">John<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><b><span lang="EN-US">From:</span></b><span lang="EN-US"> systemsafety
<a href="mailto:systemsafety-bounces@lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de" target="_blank">
<systemsafety-bounces@lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de></a> <b>On Behalf Of </b>Derek M Jones<br>
<b>Sent:</b> 14 September 2020 12:54<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:systemsafety@lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de" target="_blank">
systemsafety@lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [SystemSafety] What do we know about software reliability?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span lang="EN-US">All,<br>
<br>
What do we know about software reliability?<br>
<br>
The answer appears to be, not a lot:<br>
</span><a href="https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fshape-of-code.coding-guidelines.com%2F2020%2F09%2F13%2Flearning-useful-stuff-from-the-reliability-chapter-of-my-book&data=02%7C01%7Cthierry.coq%40dnvgl.com%7C1fbb8cb48c2f497ae54f08d85955db17%7Cadf10e2bb6e941d6be2fc12bb566019c%7C1%7C0%7C637357572581400070&sdata=q7w%2FvAsVc2u7T9rRiPSEyMBHXv1%2B38zZYZDX5gz7ObI%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank"><span lang="EN-US">http://shape-of-code.coding-guidelines.com/2020/09/13/learning-useful-stuff-from-the-reliability-chapter-of-my-book/</span></a><span lang="EN-US"><br>
<br>
-- <br>
Derek M. Jones Evidence-based software engineering<br>
tel: +44 (0)1252 520667 blog:</span><a href="https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fshape-of-code.coding-guidelines.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cthierry.coq%40dnvgl.com%7C1fbb8cb48c2f497ae54f08d85955db17%7Cadf10e2bb6e941d6be2fc12bb566019c%7C1%7C0%7C637357572581400070&sdata=UBz%2B0QFeCbOlawmTb5tjywh235pV7mmuf2FLj%2B6r6xc%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank"><span lang="EN-US">shape-of-code.coding-guidelines.com</span></a><span lang="EN-US"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
The System Safety Mailing List<br>
</span><a href="mailto:systemsafety@TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE" target="_blank"><span lang="EN-US">systemsafety@TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE</span></a><span lang="EN-US"><br>
Manage your subscription: </span><a href="https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fsystemsafety&data=02%7C01%7Cthierry.coq%40dnvgl.com%7C1fbb8cb48c2f497ae54f08d85955db17%7Cadf10e2bb6e941d6be2fc12bb566019c%7C1%7C0%7C637357572581410066&sdata=Jh1OFic%2B3NzUN68AVH71VmkJMbYdg7k3TY12hiVunQo%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank"><span lang="EN-US">https://lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de/mailman/listinfo/systemsafety</span></a><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center">
<hr size="2" width="100%" align="center">
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">If you are not the intended recipient, please notify our Help Desk at Email
</span><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"><a href="mailto:Information.Solutions@nats.co.uk" target="_blank"><span lang="EN-US">Information.Solutions@nats.co.uk</span></a></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">
immediately. You should not copy or use this email or attachment(s) for any purpose nor disclose their contents to any other person.
<br>
<br>
NATS computer systems may be monitored and communications carried on them recorded, to secure the effective operation of the system.
<br>
<br>
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.
<br>
<br>
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.</span><span lang="EN-US">
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center">
<hr size="2" width="100%" align="center">
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<pre><span lang="EN-US">_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span lang="EN-US">The System Safety Mailing List<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><a href="mailto:systemsafety@TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE" target="_blank"><span lang="EN-US">systemsafety@TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE</span></a><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span lang="EN-US">Manage your subscription: </span><a href="https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fsystemsafety&data=02%7C01%7Cthierry.coq%40dnvgl.com%7C1fbb8cb48c2f497ae54f08d85955db17%7Cadf10e2bb6e941d6be2fc12bb566019c%7C1%7C0%7C637357572581410066&sdata=Jh1OFic%2B3NzUN68AVH71VmkJMbYdg7k3TY12hiVunQo%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank"><span lang="EN-US">https://lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de/mailman/listinfo/systemsafety</span></a><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></pre>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<pre><span lang="EN-US">_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span lang="EN-US">The System Safety Mailing List<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><a href="mailto:systemsafety@TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE" target="_blank"><span lang="EN-US">systemsafety@TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE</span></a><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span lang="EN-US">Manage your subscription: </span><a href="https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fsystemsafety&data=02%7C01%7Cthierry.coq%40dnvgl.com%7C1fbb8cb48c2f497ae54f08d85955db17%7Cadf10e2bb6e941d6be2fc12bb566019c%7C1%7C0%7C637357572581410066&sdata=Jh1OFic%2B3NzUN68AVH71VmkJMbYdg7k3TY12hiVunQo%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank"><span lang="EN-US">https://lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de/mailman/listinfo/systemsafety</span></a><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre><span lang="EN-US">-- <o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span lang="EN-US">Peter Bishop<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span lang="EN-US">Chief Scientist<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span lang="EN-US">Adelard LLP<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span lang="EN-US">24 Waterside, 44-48 Wharf Road, London N1 7UX<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span lang="EN-US">Email: </span><a href="mailto:pgb@adelard.com" target="_blank"><span lang="EN-US">pgb@adelard.com</span></a><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span lang="EN-US">Tel: +44-(0)20-7832 5850<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span lang="EN-US">Registered office: 5th Floor, Ashford Commercial Quarter, 1 Dover Place, Ashford, Kent TN23 1FB<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span lang="EN-US">Registered in England & Wales no. OC 304551. VAT no. 454 489808<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span lang="EN-US">This e-mail, and any attachments, is confidential and for the use of<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span lang="EN-US">the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span lang="EN-US">telephone 020 7832 5850. We do not accept legal responsibility for<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
<pre><span lang="EN-US">this e-mail or any viruses.<o:p></o:p></span></pre>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">_______________________________________________<br>
The System Safety Mailing List<br>
</span><a href="mailto:systemsafety@TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE" target="_blank"><span lang="EN-US">systemsafety@TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE</span></a><span lang="EN-US"><br>
Manage your subscription: </span><a href="https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fsystemsafety&data=02%7C01%7Cthierry.coq%40dnvgl.com%7C1fbb8cb48c2f497ae54f08d85955db17%7Cadf10e2bb6e941d6be2fc12bb566019c%7C1%7C0%7C637357572581420056&sdata=ifK%2BVel%2FZ85LsiOPHLiwqrwTFh0wd105R9o0P8vtVDM%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank"><span lang="EN-US">https://lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de/mailman/listinfo/systemsafety</span></a><span lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<div style="font-size:7pt; color:rgb(102,102,102); font-family: 'Verdana',sans-serif;">
<br>
**************************************************************************************<br>
This e-mail and any attachments thereto may contain confidential information and/or information protected by intellectual property rights for the exclusive attention of the intended addressees named above. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify the sender by return e-mail and delete this message and its attachments. Unauthorized use, copying or further full or partial distribution of this e-mail or its contents is prohibited.<br>
**************************************************************************************<br>
</div>
</body>
</html>