The use of Interaction Laws on Air Traffic Control for Specifying Dependable Interactions Apt 02 03/04/2007 Domain Analysis Rodrigo Paes

Apresentação em tema: "The use of Interaction Laws on Air Traffic Control for Specifying Dependable Interactions Apt 02 03/04/2007 Domain Analysis Rodrigo Paes"— Transcrição da apresentação:

1 The use of Interaction Laws on Air Traffic Control for Specifying Dependable Interactions Apt 02 03/04/2007 Domain Analysis Rodrigo Paes rbp@les.inf.puc-rio.br

2 Rodrigo Paes - rbp@les.inf.puc-rio.br © LES/PUC-Rio Agenda Typical Scenario –Flight Plan Approval –Take Off –En route –Landing Dependability –Fault-tolerance (controllers and pilots) –DepExp Laws Implementation … so far

3 Rodrigo Paes - rbp@les.inf.puc-rio.br © LES/PUC-Rio Cenário Típico

4 Rodrigo Paes - rbp@les.inf.puc-rio.br © LES/PUC-Rio Flight plan approval (Flight Plan, Airplane information) Approve plan Ground instructions

5 Rodrigo Paes - rbp@les.inf.puc-rio.br © LES/PUC-Rio Take off (Ask permission to take-off) (permission) takeoff

6 Rodrigo Paes - rbp@les.inf.puc-rio.br © LES/PUC-Rio En route intersections airways radar controller sector weather

7 Rodrigo Paes - rbp@les.inf.puc-rio.br © LES/PUC-Rio Sequence diagram under normal situations

8 Rodrigo Paes - rbp@les.inf.puc-rio.br © LES/PUC-Rio Laws During the flight approval –If the controller approves the flight plan, it must be verified if the airplane has the minimum autonomy, i.e., A -> B -> C + 45 min. (DEP) (ARR) (ALT) (reserva) During the flight –Airplanes must keep a safe distance Both vertical and horizontal Landing –There is minimum amount of time between two landings

9 Rodrigo Paes - rbp@les.inf.puc-rio.br © LES/PUC-Rio Dependability Risk analysis (what can go wrong?) –Communication failures Airplane – Controller Radar – Controller –Controller unavailability –Controller behaves against the laws She authorizes the take off of an airplane not in conformance with the minimum autonomy rule She informs changes in the flight plan. However these changes are not in conformance with the safe distance rule She does not comply with thee minimum time interval rule while authorizing the landing –Airplane behaves against the laws She changes the flight plan with no authorization from the controller

10 Rodrigo Paes - rbp@les.inf.puc-rio.br © LES/PUC-Rio Dependability Dependability Explicit Computing –We can keep continuously improving the system by: Assessing bad controllers and aircraft and perform actions to deal with them –Assessment can be done automatically by monitoring the laws –Dependability data Controllers Aircraft –Examples Each time a controller or an aircraft performs an action that is not in conformance with the laws, then we should update the dependability database

11 Rodrigo Paes - rbp@les.inf.puc-rio.br © LES/PUC-Rio XMLaw Scenes takeOff monitoring controllerOrders handOver landing

12 Rodrigo Paes - rbp@les.inf.puc-rio.br © LES/PUC-Rio TakeOff takeOff{ msg1{airplane, controller, handshake($flightPlan,$airplaneInfo)} msg2{controller, airplane, $groundInstructions} msg3{airplane, controller, askPermission} msg4{controller, airplane, ok} s1{initial} s5{success} t1{s1->s2, msg1} t2{s2->s3, msg2} t3{s3->s4, msg3} t4{s4->s5, msg4, [checkMinimumAutonomy]} // takeOff scene's constraints checkMinimumAutonomy{br.pucrio.CheckMinimumAutonomy} }

13 Rodrigo Paes - rbp@les.inf.puc-rio.br © LES/PUC-Rio Monitoring monitoring{ msg1{radar, controller, $flightProgressStrip} msg2{airplane, controller, $flightProgressStrip} msg3{airplane, controller, landing} s1{initial} s3{success} t1{s1->s2, msg1} t2{s1->s2, msg2} t3{s2->s2, msg1} t4{s2->s2, msg2} t5{s2->s3, msg3} }

14 Rodrigo Paes - rbp@les.inf.puc-rio.br © LES/PUC-Rio ControllerOrders controllerOrders{ msg1{controller, airplane, $changeFlightPlan} msg2{controller, airplane, end} s1{initial} s3{success} t1{s1->s2, msg1} t2{s2->s2, msg1} t3{s2->s3, end} }

15 Rodrigo Paes - rbp@les.inf.puc-rio.br © LES/PUC-Rio Handover handover{ msg1{controller, airplane, $switchController} s1{initial} s2{success} t1{s1->s2, msg1} }

16 Rodrigo Paes - rbp@les.inf.puc-rio.br © LES/PUC-Rio landing landing{ msg1{airplane, controller, $askPermission} msg2{controller, airplane, ok} s1{initial} s3{success} t1{s1->s2, msg1} t2{s2->s3, ok, [checkMinimumDistance]} // landing scene's constraints checkMinimumDistance{br.pucrio.CheckMinimumDistance} }

17 Rodrigo Paes - rbp@les.inf.puc-rio.br © LES/PUC-Rio Actions globais // Global action informControllerAndAirplane{(takeOff.checkMinimumAutonomy), br.pucrio.InformControllerAndAirplane} detectFlightPlanChanges{(monitoring.t1, monitoring.t2, monitoring.t3, monitoring.t4, controllerOrders.t1, controllerOrders.t2)}

18 Rodrigo Paes - rbp@les.inf.puc-rio.br © LES/PUC-Rio Next steps Implementation level –Integrate with XMLaw Change the interpreter of MLaw –Implement Graphical Visualization Research –Read Jean-Pierres Project –Write Tech Report Focus on the flexibility of Laws to deal with dependability

19 DEMO

20 Rodrigo Paes - rbp@les.inf.puc-rio.br © LES/PUC-Rio Bibliografia Preliminar Sales, C. R., Sala de Regulamento de Tráfego Aéreo; http://www.airandinas.com/ - acessado em 18/01/2007 http://www.airandinas.com/ Ljungberg, M. and A. Lucas, The OASIS Air Traffic Management System, in Second Pacific Rim International Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 1992: Seoul, Korea. Ndovie, B., Simulation of a conflict management system for air traffic control, in Second International Working Conference on CKBS. 1994: DAKE Centre, University of Keele. Felici, M., Capturing Emerging Complex Interactions - Safety Analysis in ATM, in Workshop on Complexity in Design and Engineering. 2005: Edinburgh, Scotlad.

21 Obrigado! Rodrigo Paes rbp@les.inf.puc-rio.br