Search

This paper presents a taxonomy that allows defining the fault tolerance regimes fail-operational, fail-degraded, and fail-safe in the context of automotive systems. Fault tolerance regimes such as these are widely used in recent publications related to automated driving, yet without definitions. This largely holds true for automotive safety standards, too. We show that fault tolerance regimes defined in scientific publications related to the automotive domain are partially ambiguous as well as taxonomically unrelated. The presented taxonomy is based on terminology stemming from ISO 26262 as well as from systems engineering. It uses four criteria to distinguish fault tolerance regimes. In addition to fail-operational, fail-degraded, and fail-safe, the core terminology consists of operational and fail-unsafe. These terms are supported by definitions of available performance, nominal performance, functionality, and a concise definition of the safe state. For verification, we show by means of two examples from the automotive domain that the taxonomy can be applied to hierarchical systems of different complexity., Comment: 12 pages, 4 figures, 1 table, appeared in the IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 251-262

Three-quarters of students want more information about where their fees go. They have been promised this information for many years but it has been slow to arrive in accessible forms. Now the Office for Students, which has a statutory duty to ensure students receive value for money, is making it happen. This is in the interests of taxpayers and policymakers as well as students. This report looks at the background to providing better information on where fees go and explains why it is important. It also includes case studies from across the higher education sector. There are 10 recommendations for the future, aimed at institutions, regulators and government that are designed to improve transparency and public understanding.