The Indefeasibility Criterion for Assurance Cases
John Rushby
Appears in
postproceedings of a Shonan Workshop, pp. 259--279, Springer, July 2020,
Yamine Ait Ameur, Dominique Mery, and Shin Nakajima eds.
An overview of my papers on
assurance cases
The workshop was held in November 2016, but the paper was
substantially updated in 2019, and published in July 2020.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5054-6_12
Here's
a video of
a pretty good talk on the topic at Fortiss from June 2017, and here are the
slides.
Abstract
Ideally, assurance enables us to know that our system is safe, or
possesses other attributes we care about. True knowledge requires
omniscience, and the best we humans can achieve is justified belief.
So what justification should be considered adequate for a belief in
safety? We adopt a criterion from epistemology and argue that
assurance should be "indefeasible," meaning that we must be so sure
that all doubts and objections have been attended to that there is no
(or, more realistically, we cannot imagine any) new information that
would cause us to change our evaluation.
We explore the application of this criterion to the interpretation and
evaluation of assurance cases.
Available
at Springer
Link (likely paywalled)
or here
PDF
BibTeX Entry
@inproceedings{Rushby:Shonan16,
AUTHOR = {John Rushby},
TITLE = {The Indefeasibility Criterion for Assurance Cases},
BOOKTITLE = {Implicit and Explicit Semantics Integration in Proof
Based Developments of Discrete Systems},
YEAR = 2020,
MONTH = jul,
ADDRESS = {Kanagawa, Japan},
SERIES = {Communications of {NII Shonan} Meetings},
PAGES = {259--279},
PUBLISHER = {Springer},
NOTE = {Postproceedings of a workshop held in November 2016}
}
Having trouble reading our papers?
Return to John Rushby's bibliography page
Return to the Formal Methods Program home page
Return to the Computer Science Laboratory home page