Electronic Data Processing Error Detection via Dual Data Type Comparison

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing methods for checking electronic data processing means, especially in safety-critical applications, are costly and complex due to the need for redundant designs and hardware redundancy, which is not feasible with central servers and can miss errors until they cause noticeable malfunctions.

Innovation Solution

A method using two different data types to operate and compare results from electronic data processing means, allowing for error detection without redundant execution, enabling the use of standard software and hardware, and simplifying the check process by comparing results with a test criterion.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If redundant hardware and software are used to ensure safety-critical operation, then reliability is improved, but device complexity and costs increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesafety-critical operationVSAvoidredundant design
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent changes the data type parameter used in calculations (e.g., switching between floating-point and integer arithmetic) to create different execution paths that can be compared for error detection, avoiding the need for redundant hardware while maintaining reliability

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The patent creates a virtual copy of the calculation process by executing the same operation with different data types and comparing the results, enabling error detection without duplicating the physical hardware

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

2Reliability

If redundant execution is implemented to detect errors, then reliability is improved, but productivity decreases due to additional computational overhead

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveerror detectionVSAvoidcomputational efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies partial redundancy by performing the verification operation only once with a different data type rather than fully redundant execution, achieving error detection with minimal additional computational overhead

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

3Device complexity

If standard hardware and software are used without redundancy, then device complexity is reduced, but reliability deteriorates in safety-critical applications

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvestandard componentsVSAvoidsafety assurance
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces the mechanical/hardware-based redundancy system with a software-based verification method using different data types, allowing standard hardware to achieve enhanced reliability through intelligent software processing

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

4Productivity

If central servers are used for data processing, then productivity is improved through cloud computing, but reliability cannot be ensured without additional safety precautions

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecomputing capacityVSAvoiderror-free results
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent introduces data type transformation as an intermediary verification layer between the central server's computation and the final result, allowing cloud computing to be used while providing an additional check for computational errors

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Data Source

PatentEP3629177B1Method for checking an operation of an electronic data processing means
Publication Date: 2021.09.01 SICK AG
  • EP3629177B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3629177B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP3629177B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

A method for verifying the operation of at least one electronic data processing device comprises the following steps: operating the device using a first data type to obtain a first operating result, operating the device using a second data type to obtain a second operating result, comparing the first operating result and the second operating result using at least one predefined test criterion, and generating a signal if the at least one predefined test criterion is violated.