A controlled experiment for the empirical evaluation of safety analysis techniques for safety-critical software
Asim Abdulkhaleq, Stefan Wagner

TL;DR
This study empirically compares FTA, FMEA, and STPA safety analysis techniques for safety-critical software, finding STPA more effective in identifying safety requirements but more time-consuming.
Contribution
It provides a quantitative comparison of three safety analysis techniques, highlighting STPA's strengths and trade-offs in practical application.
Findings
STPA identifies more safety requirements than FTA and FMEA.
No significant difference in applicability, understandability, ease of use.
STPA requires more time to perform, especially for inexperienced analysts.
Abstract
Context: Today's safety critical systems are increasingly reliant on software. Software becomes responsible for most of the critical functions of systems. Many different safety analysis techniques have been developed to identify hazards of systems. FTA and FMEA are most commonly used by safety analysts. Recently, STPA has been proposed with the goal to better cope with complex systems including software. Objective: This research aimed at comparing quantitatively these three safety analysis techniques with regard to their effectiveness, applicability, understandability, ease of use and efficiency in identifying software safety requirements at the system level. Method: We conducted a controlled experiment with 21 master and bachelor students applying these three techniques to three safety-critical systems: train door control, anti-lock braking and traffic collision and avoidance. Results:…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
