COTS Processor Core Redundancy for Signal Integrity

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

The development and testing of safety-critical computer systems in industries like aerospace are time-consuming and expensive due to stringent certification requirements for hardware and software, limiting the use of specialized components to specific applications.

Innovation Solution

A computer system utilizing multiple dissimilar COTS processor cores connected through a network-on-a-chip (NoC) for comparing output signals, ensuring data integrity and availability by evaluating and selecting signals within an error tolerance range, thereby minimizing design errors and reducing costs.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If certified hardware components (ASIC, processors) are used to ensure safety-critical reliability, then system reliability is improved, but development cost and time increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem reliabilityVSAvoiddevelopment time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments the certification requirement from individual hardware components to the overall system level. Instead of certifying each ASIC or processor core separately through lengthy processes like RTCA DO-178b/DO-254, the invention uses multiple uncertified COTS processor cores with runtime comparison mechanisms, shifting certification focus to the system architecture and output validation rather than individual components.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The invention creates functional copies through multiple COTS processor cores that execute the same computational tasks. These replicated cores produce output signals that are compared at the system level, allowing uncertified components to achieve certified-level reliability through redundancy and comparison rather than component-level certification.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

2Reliability

If certified hardware components are used, then system reliability is improved, but manufacturing cost increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem reliabilityVSAvoidmanufacturing cost
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The invention replaces expensive certified hardware components with cheaper COTS (commercial off-the-shelf) processor cores. These inexpensive standard components are used in multiple copies, and their reliability is achieved through system-level comparison rather than individual component certification, dramatically reducing manufacturing costs while maintaining safety-critical reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #27Cheap short-living objects (Disposable)

Solution Approach 2:

The system uses universal COTS processor cores that can be used across multiple applications rather than specialized certified components designed for single safety-critical applications. These standard components serve multiple purposes and can be reused, reducing overall system cost while the comparison mechanism ensures reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

3Reliability

If specialized certified components are used, then system integrity is improved, but adaptability decreases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem integrityVSAvoidapplication versatility
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The invention employs universal COTS processor cores that are not limited to specific safety-critical applications. These standard components can be adapted to various computing tasks while the system-level comparison mechanism maintains integrity, enabling the same hardware platform to serve multiple applications unlike specialized certified components.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Solution Approach 2:

Instead of achieving integrity through specialized certified components (bottom-up approach), the invention inverts the approach by using standard uncertified components and achieving integrity through system-level comparison and validation (top-down approach). This allows greater adaptability while maintaining safety-critical integrity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #13The other way round (Inversion)

Data Source

PatentUS9612922B2Computer system and method for comparing output signals
Publication Date: 2017.04.04 HENSOLDT SENSORS GMBH
  • US9612922B2 patent drawing
  • US9612922B2 patent drawing
  • US9612922B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A computer system includes at least two COTS processor cores and an evaluating device connected to the at least two COTS processor cores for evaluating output signals output by means of the at least two COTS processor cores. The evaluating device includes a comparator for pair-wise comparison of the respective generated output signals with each other. The comparator also outputs a comparison signal corresponding to the respective comparison of the output signals.