Pith. sign in

REVIEW

BFL: a Logic to Reason about Fault Trees

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2208.13424 v2 pith:BHDSAQVU submitted 2022-08-29 cs.SE

BFL: a Logic to Reason about Fault Trees

classification cs.SE
keywords faultlogicanalysispropertiesreasonsystemstreetrees
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Safety-critical infrastructures must operate safely and reliably. Fault tree analysis is a widespread method used to assess risks in these systems: fault trees (FTs) are required - among others - by the Federal Aviation Authority, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, in the ISO26262 standard for autonomous driving and for software development in aerospace systems. Although popular both in industry and academia, FTs lack a systematic way to formulate powerful and understandable analysis queries. In this paper, we aim to fill this gap and introduce Boolean Fault tree Logic (BFL), a logic to reason about FTs. BFL is a simple, yet expressive logic that supports easier formulation of complex scenarios and specification of FT properties. Alongside BFL, we present model checking algorithms based on binary decision diagrams (BDDs) to analyse specified properties in BFL, patterns and an algorithm to construct counterexamples. Finally, we propose a case-study application of BFL by analysing a COVID19-related FT.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.