‹‹ Wed Afternoon | Thu Morning |  Thu Afternoon | Fri Morning | Fri Afternoon | Saturday ››

Friday Morning Session Details

For October 13, 2017, morning session schedule click here.

Section Date Time	October 13, 2017, 8:30 am – 9:10 am
Session	Session 6a
Presenters	David Walden
Title	Back to Basics: The Alphabet Soup of Systems Engineering Development Models
Summary	There are a preponderance of development models that Systems Engineers must correctly apply to their projects. Many of the models are designated by letters such a V, Z, and W. To the new systems engineer, these deployment models can resemble an alphabet soup. This presentation reviews the most popular and relevant development models and provides an overview of each model’s advantages and disadvantages. This presentation also introduces a new N model, applicable for Brownfield Systems Engineering efforts. Guidance will be given on considerations for choosing which model is best suited for various project situations.

Section Date Time	October 13, 2017, 9:15 am – 9:55 am
Session	Session 6b
Presenters	Troy Peterson
Title	INCOSE's Transformation Strategic Objective
Summary	While complex systems transform the landscape, the Systems Engineering discipline is also experiencing a transformation to model based discipline. In alignment with this, one of the International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE) strategic objectives is to accelerate this transformation. INCOSE is building a broad community that promotes and advances model based methods. This model based transformation is necessary to advance the discipline and handle the seamless integration of computational algorithms and physical components across domains and traditional system boundaries. This presentation will cover current INCOSE activities directed at accelerating the transformation of Systems Engineering to a model based discipline and share the latest findings and advancements toward achieving this objective.

Section Date Time	October 13, 2017, 8:30 am – 9:10 am
Session	Session 7a
Presenters	Peter Tuddenham
Title	Systems Literacy Workshop Overview
Summary	The Systems Literacy presentation will cover the work that has been conducted on developing Systems Literacy ideas and principles in collaboration with INCOSE at previous IWs and IS in Scotland, the International Society for the Systems Sciences (ISSS) conferences and the International Federation of Systems Research (IFSR) bi-annual conversation, as well as work with Ocean, Earth and Atmospheric scientists. Other models and examples from Ocean Literacy and Earth Science Literacy will be presented. The goals and activities of the all day workshop on Saturday of the GLRC-11 Conference will be covered.

Section Date Time	October 13, 2017, 9:15 am – 9:55 am
Session	Session 7b
Presenters	William Schindel
Title	Big Data, Small Data, the Digital Thread, and PLE: Leveraging Existing Assets Using S*Metadata
Summary	The triumphs of the physical sciences, and their exploitation by engineering disciplines founded on them, have powered much of the acceleration of progress in human life during the last three centuries. Central to this progress has been the extraction of simplifying patterns from the bewildering complexity of Nature, yielding powerful laws that predict, explain, and permit synthesis of engineered systems. Today we are seeing a recapitulation of this history, as information technology enables both Big Data and its projection onto System Patterns that compress and extract meaning. In this talk, the takeaways we will summarize are how S*Patterns from the world of Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) are used to 1) accelerate the federation of the Digital Thread using existing enterprise databases, engineering tools, telemetry and information systems, and the data they already contain; 2) harvest MBSE product line engineering (PLE) patterns from existing legacy product information; and 3) enhance effective life cycle collaboration between different organizations and specialists. Targeted audiences include practicing systems engineers, business and IT strategists, process owners, and organizational leaders.

Section Date Time	October 13, 2017, 8:30 am – 9:10 am
Session	Session 8a
Presenters	David Gelperin
Title	Arguing Software Safety: An Alternative to Safety Cases
Summary	Safety Cases have been a major focus of work on assurance methods. We propose an alternative method called Arguing Software Safety (ASS). ASS is a naturally incremental series of safety tasks and validation tasks along with their post-condition claims, assumptions, evidence, and arguments. It is a mixture of prescribed tasks and evidence-based arguments. Its structure makes it easier to create, understand, modify, and regulate than safety cases and more effective in building confidence than prescribed tasks alone. ASS safety and validation tasks are: 1. System hazard and potentially harmful event identification with skeptical validation [for embedded software] 2. Software safety requirement specification (including safety-relevant functions, quality attributes, and constraints) with skeptical validation 3. Conceptual safety analysis with skeptical validation 4. Architectural safety analysis with skeptical validation 5. Detailed safety analysis with skeptical validation 6. Residual risk identification with skeptical validation 7. Software safety achievement logging with skeptical validation 8. Software safety verification logging with skeptical validation We assume that software safety has been adequately achieved if all these tasks are completed without unresolved disagreements. We illustrate ASS with fragments of an argument for the safety of self-driving control software. Audience is any systems engineer concerned with assuring software safety. A takeaway is understanding how to build an ASS argument.

Section Date Time	October 13, 2017, 9:15 am – 9:55 am
Session	Session 8b
Presenters	Brian R Larson
Title	Proving Correctness of Safety-Critical Software
Summary	The Behavior Language for Embedded Systems with Software (BLESS) adds formal behavior specification and implementation to Architecture Analysis and Design Language (AADL) architectures. By treating programs, their specifications, and their executions as mathematical objects BLESS allows formal proof that every program execution will meet its specification. Proved-correct programs still need to be tested, but those test will confirm correctness rather than discover bugs. In particular, BLESS was created for use by real engineers designing real systems. To prove correctness, BLESS programs are annotated with assertions about what is true about the system at particular points. The assertions form a "proof outline" which is transformed into an inductive proof of correctness by the BLESS Proof Engine. The presentation will describe the applicability of BLESS, show an example, and demonstrate use of the BLESS Proof Engine.

Section Date Time	October 13, 2017, 10:30 am – 11:10 am
Session	Session 9a
Presenters	Jack Stein, Mary Beth Chrisses, and Paul Heininger
Title	What Every SE and PM Needs to Know About the Update to International Risk Management Standard INCOSE/IEC/IEEE 16085
Summary	Risk management is a very important part of both Systems Engineering (SE) and Engineering Program Management (PM). Ideally, risk management is planned and performed in an integrated manner with all other SE and PM knowledge and process areas, as well as with necessary parts of the context organization and environment. In other words, applying a systems approach to risk management is very desirable, if not essential, to success. “ISO/IEC/IEEE 16085, Systems and software engineering – Life cycle processes – Risk management” became part of a “suite” of international systems and software standards with the publication of its first edition in 2006. At that time its writers envisioned a universally accepted risk management standard that would serve to compliment “ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288, Systems and software engineering — Systems life cycle processes” and thereby the “INCOSE Systems Engineering (SE) Handbook” as well. But much has changed since 2006, making the refreshing of ISO/IEC/IEEE 16085 critical to maintaining value to its users. Since 2006, ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288 has been updated twice, and the publication of new, overarching international risk management standard in 2009, “ISO 31000, Risk management — Principles and guidelines”, which calls for a risk management framework, continual risk management process improvement, and consideration of context, and cultural and human factors aspects of risk management, has in several respects changed the landscape for risk management. In addition, due to technological advancement and the increasing size and complexity of engineering projects and programs, it has become difficult for risk managers to deal with the variation between, and the increasing number of, safety, security, and risk related standards, regulations, engineering specifications, and contractual agreements that are encountered in a typical systems engineering program. Over the past decade, for example, the number and types of products, systems, and stakeholders vulnerable to cyber threats has increased dramatically. Correspondingly, the number of cybersecurity related standards, regulations, and practices have increased as well. Integrating the new cybersecurity related risks, along with the associated standards, regulations, and many other requirements, into the overall risk management program represents a new, or at least a much greater, challenge for many risk managers. The challenge is compounded for systems that involve other new risk categories that might come from other knowledge and industry domain area such as biological engineering, new human-machine interfaces, implants, robotic medical devices, micro-machines, artificial intelligence, and autonomous vehicles – to name just a few! Members of the INCOSE Risk Management Working Group (RMWG), together with risk management practitioners at the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), the Project Management Institute (PMI), and a number of other associations and national standards bodies (NSBs) from around the world, have come together through ISO/IEC JTC1 SC7 WG7 to update ISO/IEC/IEEE 16085. The proposed update to ISO/IEC/IEEE 16085 includes significant revisions to the 2006 edition intended to (a) achieve compatibility with ISO 31000, (b) define a framework for an integrated systems approach to risk management, and (c) facilitate aspects of the performance of risk management for software and systems engineering programs, including, and in particular, those large in size and complexity. The target audience for this presentation (or “workshop” if preferably called so) includes Risk Managers, Risk Analysts, Systems Engineers (SEs), Software Engineers, Safety Engineers, Project/Program Managers (PMs), engineering managers, engineering professionals, executives: Attendees will benefit from a comprehensive overview of the first ISO/IEC/IEEE 16085 working draft (WD), submitted to ISO/IEC JTC 1 in August 2017. This will provide them with knowledge and understanding of the standard early on in the standards development process, giving them additional time to start preparing for implementation of the updated standard in their work environment, and to participate in its review prior to publication. Attendees will be invited to participate in an interactive Q&A session in which feedback on the standard will be encouraged.

Section Date Time	October 13, 2017, 11:15 am – 11:55 am
Session	Session 9b
Presenters	David Flanigan
Title	Cyber-Physical Systems Engineering Mission Risk Analysis
Summary	As physical systems are increasingly becoming connected, the increased risk exposure may prevent systems from successfully completing their intended capabilities and missions. Traditional risk analysis has focused on the classification of risks in a qualitative manner to estimate the probability of the risk occurring and the consequence if the intended risk comes true. However, there is not a quantitative means to define the mission impact if the risk occurs. Traditional risk analysis also focuses exclusively on physical and cyber-risks, but not the combined effects, e.g. how a cyber-risk could affect the physical system, and vice versa. A methodology is provided to visualize the cyber-physical topology of a system, identification of potential threat vectors, and the propagation of the cyber-physical threat effects throughout the mission model. This methodology seeks to quantify the mission impact if risks are realized, using an illustrative example.

Section Date Time	October 13, 2017, 10:30 am – 11:55 am
Session	Panel Discussion 2
Moderator	Michael Vinarcik
Panelists	David Long, Dave Walden, Eric Alexander, Matthew Hause, and James Hummell
Title	Here Be Dragons: The Uncharted Waters of MBSE
Summary	This is intended to be a lighthearted (more-or-less) look at the potential pitfalls and opportunities as we move SE forward towards Vision 2025.

Section Date Time	October 13, 2017, 10:30 am – 11:10 am
Session	Session 10a
Presenters	Paul White
Title	Transitioning into a Process-based Systems Engineering Organization
Summary	Many companies work hard to create and deliver successful systems for their customers. These successful systems are the result of collaborative efforts of talented engineers, program managers, and many others. While traditional systems engineering practices have been effective in delivering systems, modern systems are being developed in interconnected environments (such as systems of systems) with: a) rapid requirements change; b) ever decreasing cycle times; c) collaboration among multiple stakeholders; and d) need for demonstrated process maturity. Traditional approaches, which have worked well in the past, are becoming increasingly inadequate to adapt to these challenges; we need new process-based approaches as we strive to produce the systems of the future. In this presentation, we will discuss some of the process models that KIHOMAC is implementing to continually improve our systems engineering processes. We will briefly present our AS9100D and CMMI implementation efforts. We will also discuss how we have incorporated agile processes into our software engineering organization and how we are adapting these processes to our systems engineering organization. We will describe how we envision implementing an agile systems engineering process that is compliant with AS9100D and CMMI. We will also highlight where we are in our process implementation, what we have learned so far, and what we envision as a possible end state.

Section Date Time	October 13, 2017, 11:15 am – 11:55 am
Session	Session 10b
Presenters	Mike Tank
Title	System Verification and Validation of Complex Systems
Summary	Is it possible to verify a system comprised of non-finite state machines? Or, when only 20% of the inference space can be tested? Or, when components have non-deterministic (or self-improving) behaviors? The presenters will share their experiences working with HVAC Control and Building Automation Systems that have these characteristics.

‹‹ Wed Afternoon | Thu Morning |  Thu Afternoon | Fri Morning | Fri Afternoon | Saturday ››