Safety-Test Model Traceability for Coverage-Driven System Testing

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current safety assessment processes for safety-critical systems are inefficient due to a disconnect between safety analyses and system design/test environments, leading to manual and limited testing efforts, especially as systems become more complex, making it difficult to ensure comprehensive coverage of safety functionalities.

Innovation Solution

A computer-implemented method that links safety models with test models to generate and analyze test cases, providing quantitative and qualitative coverage criteria for safety-relevant functionalities, enabling tracing between test cases and safety models to assess the adequacy of safety testing.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If manual safety analysis approaches (FMEA, FTA) are used separately from system design and test environments, then safety hazards can be identified, but information is lost and additional effort is required to specify tests and verify hazard prevention

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesafety hazard identificationVSAvoidinformation loss between safety analysis and test environments
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of information

Solution Approach 1:

The patent merges safety models with system and test models into a unified model-based framework. This integration allows safety hazard identification to be directly connected to system design and test specification, eliminating information loss between separate disciplines while maintaining comprehensive safety analysis capabilities.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent creates a universal model-based approach that serves multiple functions simultaneously: safety hazard identification, system design specification, and test case generation. This multi-functional model eliminates the need for separate manual processes and ensures consistent information flow across all engineering disciplines.

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

2Reliability

If safety models are created manually by safety experts together with system experts, then safety analyses can be performed, but the approach takes a lot of effort and is limited in scope

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesafety analysis capabilityVSAvoideffort and scope of safety testing
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements self-service through automated test case generation from the integrated model. The system automatically derives test cases and coverage criteria without requiring manual intervention, significantly reducing effort while expanding the scope of safety testing beyond what manual approaches can achieve.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The patent performs preliminary action by pre-defining the integrated model structure and relationships between safety, system, and test models. This preliminary modeling enables automatic derivation of test cases and coverage metrics, eliminating the need for time-consuming manual analysis while comprehensive safety testing.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

3Ease of manufacture

If conventional separate models are created for system architecture, testing, and safety analysis, then each model can be developed independently, but the models are not integrated and manual approaches are required

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveindependent model developmentVSAvoidmodel integration complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of manufactureVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent merges previously separate system architecture, testing, and safety analysis models into a single integrated model-based representation. This unified model maintains the ability to develop different aspects independently while automatically integrating them, reducing overall complexity despite the interconnected nature of the systems.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

4Ease of operation

If manual test definition is performed by looking through safety analyses, then tests can be specified, but the approach is limited in scope and requires significant effort

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetest specification capabilityVSAvoidtest coverage efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent enables self-service by automatically generating test cases and coverage criteria from the integrated model. This eliminates the need for manual test specification while maintaining ease of operation, as the system automatically derives comprehensive test requirements without requiring manual intervention or interpretation of safety analyses.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Data Source

PatentEP3961407A1Computer-implemented method and computerized device for testing a technical system
Publication Date: 2022.03.02 SIEMENS AG
  • EP3961407A1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3961407A1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP3961407A1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

The computer-implemented method for testing a technical system having a plurality of technical components comprises: providing a safety model modeling a safety relevant functionality of the technical system, providing a test model describing test cases for testing the technical system, linking elements of the safety model with elements of the test model for enabling a tracing between the test cases of the test model and the safety-relevant functionality of the safety model, testing the technical system using at least one of the test cases generated based on the test model linked with the safety model, and analyzing the testing for providing coverage criteria for the safety-relevant functionality. Further, a computer program product, a computerized device and and an arrangement having a technical system and a computerized device are suggested.