Seminar: Safety Arguments: the Good, the Bad and the Ugly


Safety Arguments: the Good, the Bad and the Ugly

Thursday 9 June, 2016 - London, UK

The slides from the presentations are available below:

01 - John Spriggs - Argh! You Meant: How to destroy the Customer's confidence in your assurance

02 - John Fox - Arguing About Safety: A Medical Perspective

03 - Paul Caseley - TBD

04 - Tim Kelly - Risk, Confidence, and Compliance arguments - a necessary discipline

05 - John Birch - Automotive Safety Arguments:The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

A final programme is now available.

This seminar will look at safety arguments and some of their issues, including:

  • Complexity
  • Change and evolution
  • Clarity and understandability
  • Modularity
  • Re-usability
  • Confirmation Bias
  • Terminology

It will do this by looking at some good and bad examples, to see how things can go wrong, and to devise ways of avoiding the traps.

Speakers include: Prof. Tim Kelly from the University of York, John Spriggs of NATS, John Birch of HORIBA MIRA, Prof. John Fox of Oxford University and Paul Caseley from DSTL.

If you would like to contribute to this seminar, please contact Mike Parsons,

All enquiries should be directed to:

Joan Atkinson, Centre for Software Reliability, Claremont Tower, Newcastle University, NE1 7RU, UK

Fax: + 44 191 208 7995          Tel:  + 44 191 221 2222          e-mail:

SCSC.UK uses anonymous session cookies please see Privacy policy

SCSC 06-03-2018 [V4e]