Next Steps

1
Next Steps

• A NITRD Perspective

2
Common NITRD Landscape

• The NITRD community (NASA, FDA, NIST, FAA, NSA,
  ONR, AFRL, DARPA, NSF, etc.) are all facing
  similar problems a crisis in the composition of
  life, safety, security, or economically critical
  systems.
• The problem is more than JUST the programming.
• At the end of the day, the recipient needs to
  have a system that is certifiable, that can be
  evaluated. Components therefore must come with
  evidence.
• The market doesnt currently distinguish between
  cherries and lemons - it doesnt even encourage
  the development of cherries!

3
Example Challenges in Systems

• Systems software and programming technology for
  integrating cross-cutting properties (Real Time,
  FT, concurrency, )
• Semantics-bearing middleware adaptive runtime
  systems
• Models of computation, concurrency
• Reflective operation
• Dynamic scheduling
• Assured, self-checking systems
• Assume-Guarantee, PCC, reflective co-processing
• Partitioning, allocation, isolation
• FMECA, FTA, SFTA
• Distributed real-time systems
• Linked physical and software design technology
• Hybrid systems models
• Multi-modal system dynamics, software
  reconfiguration, timing
• Mutually constrained systems
• Reflective runtimes Hardware, resource, power
  management optimization, reconfiguration
• Secure networked systems

4
A (fairly obvious) prediction about the Future
of Physical and Engineered Systems

• General transportation
• Highway system technologies
• Vehicle technologies
• Hybrid engines, alternative fuels
• Coordinated motor, braking, transmission
• Continuously varying transmission control
• ABS, regenerative braking, etc
• Environmental monitoring
• Global warming
• Environmental observation instrumentation,
  control
• Agriculture and ecology
• Herd health monitoring
• Remote veterinary care
• Crop condition monitoring
• Emergency response
• Rescue robotics

• Power generation and distribution
• Deregulation, competition
• Mix of generation technologies
• Fossil fuels
• Solar, wind
• Hydrogen, fuel cells
• Fusion?
• Future airspace
• Airspace management
• Free flight
• UAVs
• Critical Infrastructure Protection
• Higher performance vehicles
• Health care
• Infusion pumps, ventilators,
• EMT and ICU of the future
• Triage and transport

IT Inside
Photo Credits Boeing, GM, Medtronics
5
Some Grand Challenges

• Medical devices and systems of the future
• Now Practitioner closes the loop sensor feeds
  to TV monitor, manual settings
• Future Closed-loop patient monitoring and
  delivery systems, plug and play operating
  rooms/ICUs/home care
• Flight-critical aviation systems of the future
• Now Federated designs, pilot closes the loop
• Future Integrated designs autonomy vs. pilot
  control
• SCADA systems of the future
• Now Telemetry, sensor feeds to control center,
  centralized
• Future Hierarchical, decentralized,
  highly-automated, market/policy driven,
  closed-loop supervisory control

Now Information-centric, human in the loop,
distributed a priori, soft real-time, not
secured Future Feedback control, open and
hierarchical supervisory control, mobile,
aggregated, soft and hard real-time, secured
6
Potential Technology Grand Challenges

• Property and mechanism composition for dependable
  systems of all kinds single, composite, and ad
  hoc aggregations (RT, FT, secure)
• Cooperative distributed/aggregated systems
  (systems technology for aggregated systems)
• Robust, self-checking, self-healing, controllable
  systems (computation and control)
• Evidence-based design and composition technology,
  to produce systems with certifiably dependable
  behavior

Dependable technology for an already- emerging
class of future, critical systems
7
Observations

• System integration requires dealing with
  interaction and interference we need a
  principled framework for this.
• Industrial design practice must change towards
  the evidence-based production of certifiably
  dependable systems.
• Progress is to be found at the intersections of
  disciplines, particularly the systems and
  assurance disciplines.
• The days of monolithic, stand-alone designs are
  gone we should proceed accordingly.

8
Materializing these Observations

• DoD is becoming reinvigorated with the software
  assurance issue.
• Potential for new investment in theory, tools,
  and experiments toward software assurance.
• The community must first create a roadmap
• Short term, long term goals
• Science and prototype implementation
• Selection of one or two application domains of
  compelling national interest
• Dont circle the wagons and shoot inward!
• Can we learn something from the Physics
  community? They give great marks to proposals
  when reviewing.