Assurance 2.0

Assurance 2.0 seeks to simplify and make more rigorous, engineering arguments by a practical approach to indefeasibility based on claims, arguments and evidence (CAE) with explicit defeaters, separating deductive/inductive reasoning, using confirmation theory and CAE Blocks and theories. Evaluation is supported by three approaches to confidence: positive, negative and residual risks and a sentencing statement.

We suggest starting with either the “Manifesto” paper (broad but light on details) or the one from Cliff Jones’ Festschrift (more technical but also more narrowly focused). Look at the 2-page “Nutshell” when you need a really high-level overview or memory aid.

My coauthor and collaborator John Rushby maintains page on our Assurance 2 papers:

•  Assurance 2.0 in a Nutshell (PDF) by Robin Bloomfield and John Rushby. CSL Technical Note October 2024.
•  Confidence in Assurance 2.0 Cases by Robin Bloomfield and John Rushby. Also available as arXiv 2409.10665.
  Expanded version of a paper from The Practice of Formal Methods: Essays in Honour of Cliff Jones, Part I. Springer LNCS 14780, pp. 1–23, Sept 2024
•  Assessing Confidence in Assurance 2.0 by Robin Bloomfield and John Rushby, Technical Report SRI-CSL-2022-02, May 2022 and also available as arXiv 2205.04522, both revised May 2024
•  Defeaters and Eliminative Argumentation in Assurance 2.0 by Robin Bloomfield, Kate Netkachova, and John Rushby, Technical Report SRI-CSL-2024-01, May 2024; also available as arXiv 2405.15800.
• Assurance 2.0: A Manifesto by Robin Bloomfield and John Rushby, keynote presentation at 29th Safety-Critical Systems Symposium (SSS’21), February 2021. Draft available as arXiv 2004.10474