B. Hulin, H. Kaindl, Thomas Rathfux, R. Popp, Edin Arnautovic, Roland Beckert
{"title":"Towards a Common Safety Ontology for Automobiles and Railway Vehicles","authors":"B. Hulin, H. Kaindl, Thomas Rathfux, R. Popp, Edin Arnautovic, Roland Beckert","doi":"10.1109/EDCC.2016.15","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Automobiles and railway vehicles have their specific safety standards, respectively. Still, they are both land vehicles and thus share a large set of common hazards and accident types. This calls for a common safety ontology covering both domains. Apart from many commonalities, we found some important differences between safety standards of these domains, in particular between ISO 26262, EN 50126 and SIRF (the German Standard for railway vehicles). Based on their respective glossaries, we attempted to resolve certain differences. This led us to a common set of formalized concepts and their relations. We consider this as an important step towards a common ontology for automobiles and railway vehicles. Such an ontology should facilitate the reuse of hazard and risk analyses from one domain to the other, and it should have important application areas.","PeriodicalId":166039,"journal":{"name":"2016 12th European Dependable Computing Conference (EDCC)","volume":"120 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2016 12th European Dependable Computing Conference (EDCC)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/EDCC.2016.15","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7
Abstract
Automobiles and railway vehicles have their specific safety standards, respectively. Still, they are both land vehicles and thus share a large set of common hazards and accident types. This calls for a common safety ontology covering both domains. Apart from many commonalities, we found some important differences between safety standards of these domains, in particular between ISO 26262, EN 50126 and SIRF (the German Standard for railway vehicles). Based on their respective glossaries, we attempted to resolve certain differences. This led us to a common set of formalized concepts and their relations. We consider this as an important step towards a common ontology for automobiles and railway vehicles. Such an ontology should facilitate the reuse of hazard and risk analyses from one domain to the other, and it should have important application areas.
汽车和轨道车辆分别有其特定的安全标准。不过,它们都是陆地车辆,因此有很多共同的危险和事故类型。这就需要一个涵盖这两个领域的通用安全本体。除了许多共同点之外,我们发现这些领域的安全标准之间存在一些重要差异,特别是ISO 26262, EN 50126和SIRF(德国铁路车辆标准)之间。根据他们各自的词汇,我们试图解决某些差异。这使我们得到了一组共同的形式化概念及其关系。我们认为这是朝着汽车和轨道车辆共同本体迈出的重要一步。这样的本体应该促进从一个领域到另一个领域的危害和风险分析的重用,并且它应该具有重要的应用领域。