自动空中交通管制系统比较分析的概率模型检验

Yang Zhao, Kristin Yvonne Rozier
{"title":"自动空中交通管制系统比较分析的概率模型检验","authors":"Yang Zhao, Kristin Yvonne Rozier","doi":"10.1109/ICCAD.2014.7001427","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Ensuring aircraft stay safely separated is the primary consideration in air traffic control. To achieve the required level of assurance for this safety-critical application, the Automated Airspace Concept (AAC) proposes a network of components providing multiple levels of separation assurance, including conflict detection and resolution. In our previous work, we conducted a formal study of this concept including specification, validation, and verification utilizing the NuSMV and CadenceSMV model checkers to ensure there are no potentially catastrophic design flaws remaining in the AAC design before the next stage of production. In this paper, we extend that work to include probabilistic model checking of the AAC system.1 We are motivated by the system designers requirement to compare different design options to optimize the functional allocation of the AAC components. Probabilistic model checking provides quantitative measures for evaluating different design options, helping system designers to understand the impact of parameters in the model on a given critical safety requirement. We detail our approach to modeling and probabilistically analyzing this complex system consisting of a real-time algorithm, a logic protocol, and human factors. We utilize both Discrete Time Markov Chain (DTMC) and Continuous Time Markov Chain (CTMC) models to capture the important behaviors in the AAC components. The separation assurance algorithms, which are defined over specific time ranges, are modeled using a DTMC. The emergence of conflicts in an airspace sector and the reaction times of pilots, which can be simplified as Markov processes on continuous time, are modeled as a CTMC. Utilizing these two models, we calculate the probability of an unresolved conflict as a measure of safety and compare multiple design options.","PeriodicalId":426584,"journal":{"name":"2014 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Computer-Aided Design (ICCAD)","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"20","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Probabilistic model checking for comparative analysis of automated air traffic control systems\",\"authors\":\"Yang Zhao, Kristin Yvonne Rozier\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/ICCAD.2014.7001427\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Ensuring aircraft stay safely separated is the primary consideration in air traffic control. To achieve the required level of assurance for this safety-critical application, the Automated Airspace Concept (AAC) proposes a network of components providing multiple levels of separation assurance, including conflict detection and resolution. In our previous work, we conducted a formal study of this concept including specification, validation, and verification utilizing the NuSMV and CadenceSMV model checkers to ensure there are no potentially catastrophic design flaws remaining in the AAC design before the next stage of production. In this paper, we extend that work to include probabilistic model checking of the AAC system.1 We are motivated by the system designers requirement to compare different design options to optimize the functional allocation of the AAC components. Probabilistic model checking provides quantitative measures for evaluating different design options, helping system designers to understand the impact of parameters in the model on a given critical safety requirement. We detail our approach to modeling and probabilistically analyzing this complex system consisting of a real-time algorithm, a logic protocol, and human factors. We utilize both Discrete Time Markov Chain (DTMC) and Continuous Time Markov Chain (CTMC) models to capture the important behaviors in the AAC components. The separation assurance algorithms, which are defined over specific time ranges, are modeled using a DTMC. The emergence of conflicts in an airspace sector and the reaction times of pilots, which can be simplified as Markov processes on continuous time, are modeled as a CTMC. Utilizing these two models, we calculate the probability of an unresolved conflict as a measure of safety and compare multiple design options.\",\"PeriodicalId\":426584,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2014 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Computer-Aided Design (ICCAD)\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-11-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"20\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2014 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Computer-Aided Design (ICCAD)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCAD.2014.7001427\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2014 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Computer-Aided Design (ICCAD)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCAD.2014.7001427","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 20

摘要

确保飞机安全隔离是空中交通管制的首要考虑因素。为了实现这种安全关键应用所需的保证级别,自动空域概念(AAC)提出了一个组件网络,提供多级分离保证,包括冲突检测和解决。在我们之前的工作中,我们对这一概念进行了正式研究,包括使用NuSMV和CadenceSMV模型检查器进行规范、验证和验证,以确保在下一阶段生产之前,AAC设计中没有潜在的灾难性设计缺陷。在本文中,我们将这一工作扩展到包括AAC系统的概率模型检验我们的动机是系统设计者需要比较不同的设计方案,以优化AAC组件的功能分配。概率模型检查为评估不同的设计方案提供了定量的措施,帮助系统设计人员了解模型中参数对给定关键安全要求的影响。我们详细介绍了建模和概率分析这个由实时算法、逻辑协议和人为因素组成的复杂系统的方法。我们使用离散时间马尔可夫链(DTMC)和连续时间马尔可夫链(CTMC)模型来捕获AAC组件中的重要行为。在特定时间范围内定义的分离保证算法使用DTMC建模。将空域冲突的发生和飞行员的反应时间简化为连续时间上的马尔可夫过程,建立了CTMC模型。利用这两个模型,我们计算了未解决冲突的概率作为安全度量,并比较了多个设计方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Probabilistic model checking for comparative analysis of automated air traffic control systems
Ensuring aircraft stay safely separated is the primary consideration in air traffic control. To achieve the required level of assurance for this safety-critical application, the Automated Airspace Concept (AAC) proposes a network of components providing multiple levels of separation assurance, including conflict detection and resolution. In our previous work, we conducted a formal study of this concept including specification, validation, and verification utilizing the NuSMV and CadenceSMV model checkers to ensure there are no potentially catastrophic design flaws remaining in the AAC design before the next stage of production. In this paper, we extend that work to include probabilistic model checking of the AAC system.1 We are motivated by the system designers requirement to compare different design options to optimize the functional allocation of the AAC components. Probabilistic model checking provides quantitative measures for evaluating different design options, helping system designers to understand the impact of parameters in the model on a given critical safety requirement. We detail our approach to modeling and probabilistically analyzing this complex system consisting of a real-time algorithm, a logic protocol, and human factors. We utilize both Discrete Time Markov Chain (DTMC) and Continuous Time Markov Chain (CTMC) models to capture the important behaviors in the AAC components. The separation assurance algorithms, which are defined over specific time ranges, are modeled using a DTMC. The emergence of conflicts in an airspace sector and the reaction times of pilots, which can be simplified as Markov processes on continuous time, are modeled as a CTMC. Utilizing these two models, we calculate the probability of an unresolved conflict as a measure of safety and compare multiple design options.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信