[email protected] 6. eu rahmen program, deutschland und deppendable embedded systems
Post on 19-Dec-2015
212 views
TRANSCRIPT
6. Rahmenprogramm 2003 .. 2004: New Instruments (70% of the Budget)
Integrated ProjectsCenters of Excellence
Old Instruments (30%)Single Projects
http://www.rp6-online.de/
11.-13.November 2002 in Brüssel Eröffnungsveranstaltung zum 6. Rahmenprogramm.http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/conferences/2002/index_en.html
BMBF: 3./4. Februar 2003Informationsveranstaltung "Das 6. Forschungsrahmenprogramm - Chance für Deutschland und Europa"Hannoverhttp://www.rp6.de
6. Rahmenprogramm - Stand der Dinge
Frühjahr 2002 call for Interessenbekundungen (Expression of Interest)Feedback: 12000 EoI per EmailAbzug von unvollständigen - 800 nur das Formblatt - über 11700 zur
Bereichen:1.1.1 Genomik 19011.1.2 Informationsgesellschaft 25911.1.3 Nanotechnologien 16701.1.4 Luft- und Raumfahrt 378 *** Spizenreiter von Industrie (kaum KMUs) ****1.1.5 Lebensmittel 10081.1.6.1 Energie (kurz/mittelfristig) 4781.1.6.1 Energie (mittel/langfristig) 4521.1.6.2 Verkehr 4801.1.6.3 Global Change 14121.1.7 Bürger und Regieren 11872.2. Radioaktive Abfälle 1032.3. Strahlenschutz 99
StatistikenIntegrierte Projekte 65% Exzellenznetze 35%EoI
Wissenschaftseinrichtungen 46%Forschungsorganisationen 32%Industrie 14%
Software, embedded systems & distributed systems 11% (IPs 68% NoEs 32%)
Industry (including SMEs) 25% Public and private research organisations 21% Universities / Educational establishments 41% Other 14%
< 10 partners 46% Between 10 and 50 43% > 50 Partners 7%
Embeedded Systeme3000 Proposals, only 10% will be accepted (90% Rejected...)
15 - 20 % der EoI den Anforderungen des 'Guide for Submitters' überzeugend entsprachen; -> Befähigung teilnehmen zu können. Die Kommission bezeichnet diese EoI als 'mature'.
Analysis:
List of EoI: http://eoi.cordis.lu/search_form.cfmParner Boerse: http://2002.istevent.cec.eu.int/Report: http://www.kp.dlr.de/IT-NCP/itncp/EoI_Final_Report_2002.pdfNationale Koortinatiosstelle: http://www.kp.dlr.de/IT-NCP/
Integrated Projects
"Inflated Projects" != Integrated Projects
Integrated research + VisionIntegration>> Impact (Industry)Focused (do not do every thing)Recommendation: Long Term -> low Competition
else Parallel Development -> competition inside the consortium
The IPs organizes itself, Brussels can not influence them.Academy, Industries, SME can lead an IP
Priority: SME, Multidisciplinarynon technical Part (eg Education)
Networks of Excellence == Virtual Research CentersBring the community together with workshops
Work Program
2x 2 Calls1.1 Dec .. April 2003 (no Embedded Systems)1.2 Jun .. oct. 2003 (with Embedded Systmes)
800 M Euro for each call10 IP, 15 M Euro each (50% Fonding)Networks of Excellenz: 3 .. 5 M Euro
Safety & Security: 3 IPs (15-50 MEuro each)2 Networks of Excelenz (5 Meuro each)
AMSD: Accompanying Measure in Systems Dependability www.am-ds.org
Achieve a high level synthesis of the results of the many on-going road-mapping activities related to various aspects of system dependability,
Develop a detailed road-map, covering the various aspects of dependability for one particular class of system, namely dependable embedded systems,
Workshops with representatives from the research communities (i) Information Infrastructure Interdependencies and Vulnerabilities, (ii) Privacy and Identity Management, (iii) Trust and security in e-business processes e-commerce, e-laerning, e-government, (iv) Dependable embedded systems.
Next Workshop:November 25-27, probably in Pisa.
e-motion
AMSD: Accompanying Measure in Systems Dependability www.am-ds.org
For a coherent major initiative in FP6 encompassing a full range of dependability-related activities, e.g.availabilitysafetysecuritysurvivability etceterality
education and training
means for encouraging and enabling sector-specific IST RTD projects to use dependability best practice.
Given the reactions from Brussels proposals which form part of a well-coordinated overall programme ofdependability-related RTD will have increased chances of success i
AMSD: Accompanying Measure in Systems Dependability
Road-Maps typesScience and TechnologyIndustry applicationsCorporate Products
Methodology pre-Study (generic view)Analysis of available road mapsTake results from IPsInterviewsIterationWorkshopsConferencesConsolidate Material from other Road Maps
ResultsTechnical issuesSocio-technical issues
AMSD: Accompanying Measure in Systems Dependability
Road map of the Road map1. Application Assessment, Taxonomy and Future Needs
automotiveaerospacerailwaysmedicalprocess control
2. Technology Assessment, Taxonomy and Future Directions Semiconductor (SoC),Communication Dependability technology with particular emphasis on Real-time system and software technology: methods and tools for Interconnected networked dependable systems
3. Synthesis and Analysis of the Technology/Application Matrix
AMSD: Accompanying Measure in Systems Dependability
Technology1. Semiconductor (SoC),
smart transducers, sensors and actuators, hardware/software co-design
2. Communication wire-bound / wire-less, autonomous mobile devices, remote control, ad hoc networking and seamless connectivity
3. Dependability technology with particular emphasis on fault tolerance, functional safety, security, timeliness, dynamic reconfiguration, validation and verification, system integration (composability), maintenance/enhancementassurance of dependability properties.
4. Real-time system and software technology: methods and tools for analysis, specification, design, verification/validationcertification
5. Interconnected networked dependable systems, intelligent environemnt
AMSD: Accompanying Measure in Systems Dependability
Vision:Automotive: Accident free drivingMedical: Dependable Robot surgeonAerospace: Safe SkyRailways: ....Automation: ....
IPsDES (Dependable Systems) > 100 EoIDECOS (Dependable Embedded components and systems) > 100 EoIARTISSTORKResetBVNRapidACIPPAMPASNexTTAEWICSOLOS...
The Immediate Challenge Can the (rival) proposers of each of these three IPs agree to co-operate? Will they make this an explicit agreed part of their proposals? Will Brussels be able to help with, and complement, such a planned
co-operation scheme, e.g. during the proposal preparation period, and by setting up appropriate arrangements for IP monitoring, under the guidance of a mutually-acceptable senior (and pro-active) advisory group for the DTA?
AMSD: Accompanying Measure in Systems Dependability
PartnersUniversity of Newcastle (UK) ARC Seibersdorf research (A) CNRS-LAAS (F) CNUCE-CNR (I) Joint Research Centre (I) Adelard (UK)
Advisory Board (9 People)Consultant (UK)Gemplus (F)France Telecom (F)DaimlerChrysler (D)FhG (D)Siemens (I)Infineon (D, A)Bull (F)Air Traffic Services (UK)
Technical Board (50 People)Senior technical representatives
industryacademiagovernmentpolicy
Software for Embedded Systems
Rationals:Software plays the major role in real world systms
.... and failures ....
99 % of all microcomputers produced today (over eight billion processors) are in embedded systems. It is an enabling technology
the economic impact of which reaches far beyond its immediate market size,the success of many industrial products depends on control systems
Perform critical control functionsAutomotiveAerospaceTransportAutomationMedical devices
But ......Embedded systems becomes diffuse (where is it?):
As networking becomes pervasive, the boundaries of the field both grow, and become less distinct.
Embedded Systems What makes them different? ....Alle sind unterschiedlich... nur ich nicht...
Embedded Systemsprocessors, sensors, actuators ....intensive interaction with environment
....faults
.....noiseReal time operation Many sets of constraints on designs Computer purchased as part of some other piece of equipmentTypically dedicated software (may be user- customizable)Often replaces previously electromechanical componentsOften no real keyboardOften limited display or no general- purpose display device
Small Size, Low Weight Low Power Harsh environment
Radiation, Heat, vibration, shock, Power fluctuations, RF interference, lightning, Water, corrosion, physical abuse
Safety- critical operation Must function correctly, Must not function incorrectly Extreme cost sensitivity
behavior adapts dynamically, reconfigurable, intelligent
Embedded system designers are different (jede entwickler ist anderes, genau wie die andere 8 milliarden)
Know the big picture Appreciation for multi- disciplinary nature of designBoth hardware & software skillsUnderstanding of engineering beyond digital logicAbility to take a project from specification through production Communication & teamwork skillsWork with other disciplines, manufacturing, marketingWork with customers to understand the real problem being solvedTechnical skills too
Low level: Micro controllers, FPGA/ ASIC, assembly language, A/ D, D/ A
High level: Object- oriented Design, C/ C++, Real Time Operating SystemsToolsReal Time Tools.... ???? .
Meta level: ....
Fault -> Error -> Failure
MechanicalElectronic HWSoftware (quantification? Development errors...)People
Fault (Deviation of function) -> error (manifestation) -> Failure ....
Es gibt Fehler die sich nicht bemekrbar machen, bis man wo anderst etwas aendert, ide scheiber nichts damit zu tun hat. z.B. ein Timing hat sich gaeendert und dadruch wird sichtbar ein Sycrhonisationsfehler woanders.
Failures in million operation hoursMilitary cpu 0.022Automotive cpu0.12Electric motor 2.17battery 16.9Pumps 37.3Auto. Wiring harness (luxus) 775Software ??? (Bigger than all other)
Be awere: Statistics.... 82.839% of all statistics are controlled.
Design dependability into the system, not on top of the system
Dependability matters!Dependability matters!Most computing system projects Most computing system projects failfail
Cancelled before delivery 31%Exceeded timescales & costs 53% and reduced functionalityOn time and budget 16%Mean time overrun 190%Mean cost overrun 222%Mean functionality delivered 60%
large companies much worse than smallerlatest (2001) data better, but still poor
source: The Chaos Report http://www.standishgroup.com$60B annual cost of poor quality software in the USA
source: Microsoft 2002
how to do it better how to do it better
Professional systems engineering
Rigorous requirements capture
formal development methods
ISO 9001 quality assurance
static analysis/proof/focused testing
Effective system fault tolerance, e.g via middleware
-> Much better quality and lower costs and risks