An automated failure mode and effect analysis based on high-level design specificication with behavior trees

Formal methods have significant benefits for developing safety critical systems, in that they allow for correctness proofs, model checking safety and liveness properties, deadlock checking, etc. However, formal methods do not scale very well and demand specialist skills, when developing real-world systems. For these reasons, development and analysis of large-scale safety critical systems will require effective integration of formal and informal methods. In this paper, we use such an integrative approach to automate Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA), a widely used system safety analysis technique, using a high-level graphical modelling notation (Behavior Trees) and model checking. We inject component failure modes into the Behavior Trees and translate the resulting Behavior Trees to SAL code. This enables us to model check if the system in the presence of these faults satisfies its safety properties, specified by temporal logic formulas. The benefit of this process is tool support that automates the tedious and error-prone aspects of FMEA.

To learn from one's mistakes: The role of impulsivity in positive workplace behaviours

Recentiy a neuropsychological model of learning has been proposed Qackson, 2002) which argues that Responsibility provides a cognitive re-expression of Impulsivit)' in the prediction of functional and dysfunctional behaviour. Jackson argues that primitive, instinctive impulses lead to antisocial behaviours and socio-cognitive regulators such as Responsibility leads to the re-expression of Impulsivity in terms of pro-social behaviours. Study 1 tests and supports the measurement properties of the assessment methodology associated with the model. Study 2 provides evidence in favour of the instinctive basis of Impulsivity and the conscious basis of Responsibility, which reinforces the underlying neuropsychological basis of the model. Study 3 uses structural equation modelling to determine if Responsibility mediates Impulsivity in the prediction of a latent variable representing work performance, work commitment and team performance, but does not mediate Impulsivit}' in the prediction of a latent variable representing sexual proclivity, workplace deviancy, gambling and beer consumption. Results provide strong support for Jackson's model and suggest that Impulsivity and Responsibility are fundamental to both functional and dysfunctional learning