IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/reensy/v193y2020ics0951832019307586.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exhaustive testing of safety-critical software for reactor protection system

Author

Listed:
  • Lee, Sang Hun
  • Lee, Seung Jun
  • Shin, Sung Min
  • Lee, Eun-chan
  • Kang, Hyun Gook

Abstract

As software is used to implement safety-critical functions in nuclear power plants (NPPs), the software developers must demonstrate that the software will generate its dedicated safety signal in on-demand situations based on proper test results to ensure the safety of digitalized NPP. This paper describes an automated exhaustive test case generation framework for the function block diagram (FBD) programs used in NPP safety systems. The proposed method translates an FBD program to a semantically equivalent satisfiability modulo theories (SMT) formula based on the formal definition of FBD and generates the exhaustive test cases given desired software output by iteratively solving the SMT formula. The effectiveness of the proposed framework is demonstrated with a case study of a trip logic software of a typical NPP reactor protection system. The case study results showed that the proposed approach could effectively generate exhaustive test cases and further prove that the NPP safety software is error-free in terms of its safety function.

Suggested Citation

  • Lee, Sang Hun & Lee, Seung Jun & Shin, Sung Min & Lee, Eun-chan & Kang, Hyun Gook, 2020. "Exhaustive testing of safety-critical software for reactor protection system," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:reensy:v:193:y:2020:i:c:s0951832019307586
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2019.106667
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0951832019307586
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ress.2019.106667?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Aldemir, T. & Guarro, S. & Mandelli, D. & Kirschenbaum, J. & Mangan, L.A. & Bucci, P. & Yau, M. & Ekici, E. & Miller, D.W. & Sun, X. & Arndt, S.A., 2010. "Probabilistic risk assessment modeling of digital instrumentation and control systems using two dynamic methodologies," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(10), pages 1011-1039.
    2. Kang, Hyun Gook & Lim, Ho Gon & Lee, Ho Jung & Kim, Man Cheol & Jang, Seung Cheol, 2009. "Input-profile-based software failure probability quantification for safety signal generation systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 94(10), pages 1542-1546.
    3. Lee, Dong-Ah & Yoo, Junbeom & Lee, Jang-Soo, 2013. "A systematic verification of behavioral consistency between FBD design and ANSI-C implementation using HW-CBMC," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 139-149.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Shin, Sung-Min & Lee, Sang Hun & Shin, Seung Ki, 2022. "A novel approach for quantitative importance analysis of safety DI&C systems in the nuclear field," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    2. Ding, Zhiguo & Xing, Liudong, 2020. "Improved software defect prediction using Pruned Histogram-based isolation forest," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zio, E., 2018. "The future of risk assessment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 176-190.
    2. Babykina, Génia & Brînzei, Nicolae & Aubry, Jean-François & Deleuze, Gilles, 2016. "Modeling and simulation of a controlled steam generator in the context of dynamic reliability using a Stochastic Hybrid Automaton," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 115-136.
    3. Ghostine, Rony & Thiriet, Jean-Marc & Aubry, Jean-François, 2011. "Variable delays and message losses: Influence on the reliability of a control loop," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 160-171.
    4. Yang, Jun & Zou, Bowen & Yang, Ming, 2019. "Bidirectional implementation of Markov/CCMT for dynamic reliability analysis with application to digital I&C systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 278-290.
    5. Favarò, Francesca M. & Saleh, Joseph H., 2016. "Toward risk assessment 2.0: Safety supervisory control and model-based hazard monitoring for risk-informed safety interventions," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 316-330.
    6. McNelles, Phillip & Zeng, Zhao Chang & Renganathan, Guna & Lamarre, Greg & Akl, Yolande & Lu, Lixuan, 2016. "A comparison of Fault Trees and the Dynamic Flowgraph Methodology for the analysis of FPGA-based safety systems Part 1: Reactor trip logic loop reliability analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 135-150.
    7. Yang, Jun & Aldemir, Tunc, 2016. "An algorithm for the computationally efficient deductive implementation of the Markov/Cell-to-Cell-Mapping Technique for risk significant scenario identification," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 1-8.
    8. Peng, R. & Li, Y.F. & Zhang, W.J. & Hu, Q.P., 2014. "Testing effort dependent software reliability model for imperfect debugging process considering both detection and correction," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 37-43.
    9. Brissaud, Florent & Smidts, Carol & Barros, Anne & Bérenguer, Christophe, 2011. "Dynamic reliability of digital-based transmitters," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 96(7), pages 793-813.
    10. Tyrväinen, T., 2013. "Risk importance measures in the dynamic flowgraph methodology," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 35-50.
    11. Ilkka Karanta, 2013. "Implementing dynamic flowgraph methodology models with logic programs," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 227(3), pages 302-314, June.
    12. Shin, Sung-Min & Lee, Sang Hun & Shin, Seung Ki, 2022. "A novel approach for quantitative importance analysis of safety DI&C systems in the nuclear field," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    13. Yoo, Heejong & Heo, Gyunyoung, 2023. "Analysis of site operating state contributions for multi-unit PSA with Korean NPP Sites," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 236(C).
    14. Bolbot, Victor & Theotokatos, Gerasimos & Bujorianu, Luminita Manuela & Boulougouris, Evangelos & Vassalos, Dracos, 2019. "Vulnerabilities and safety assurance methods in Cyber-Physical Systems: A comprehensive review," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 179-193.
    15. Thieme, Christoph A. & Mosleh, Ali & Utne, Ingrid B. & Hegde, Jeevith, 2020. "Incorporating software failure in risk analysis – Part 1: Software functional failure mode classification," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    16. Jenab, K. & Sarfaraz, A. & Dhillon, B.S. & Seyed Hosseini, S.M., 2012. "Dynamic MLD analysis with flow graphs," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 80-85.
    17. McNelles, Phillip & Renganathan, Guna & Zeng, Zhao Chang & Chirila, Marius & Lu, Lixuan, 2019. "A comparison of fault trees and the Dynamic Flowgraph Methodology for the analysis of FPGA-based safety systems part 2: Theoretical investigations," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 60-83.
    18. Bas, Esra, 2011. "An investment plan for preventing child injuries using risk priority number of failure mode and effects analysis methodology and a multi-objective, multi-dimensional mixed 0-1 knapsack model," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 96(7), pages 748-756.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:reensy:v:193:y:2020:i:c:s0951832019307586. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/reliability-engineering-and-system-safety .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.