PICASSOS – Practical Applications of Automated Formal Methods to Safety Related Automotive Systems
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">PICASSOS was a UK government funded programme to improve the ability of automotive supply chains to develop complex software-intensive systems with high safety assurance and at an acceptable cost. This was executed by a consortium of three universities and five companies including an automotive OEM and suppliers. Three major elements of the PICASSOS project were: use of automated model based verification technology utilising formal methods; application of this technology in the context of ISO 26262; and evaluation to measure the impact of this approach to inform key management decisions on the costs, benefits and risks of applying this technology on live projects. The project spanned system level design and software development. This was achieved by using a unified model based process incorporating SysML at the system level and using Simulink and Stateflow auto-coded into C at the software level. An ISO 26262 compliant development process based on those already used by the commercial partners was used as a baseline, and a modified process using formal methods was developed. Tools that are commercially available were used wherever possible, and technology demonstrators were generated within the programme for enhancement and eventual commercial sale subsequently. A number of trials were undertaken comparing these two processes during simulated development of Electric Vehicle based systems. The paper includes the results of one of the trials, showing that the formal methods-based approach found errors that were missed by a standard model-verification process at software unit level and showing how it can do so with reduced effort.</div></div>
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it