The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Evaluation of safety-critical software
Open accessAbstract
Methods and approaches for testing the reliability and trustworthiness of software remain among the most controversial issues facing this age of high technology. The authors present some of the crucial questions faced by software programmers and eventual users.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Several procedures for estimating reliability have been proposed, including fault and event tree analysis [64] and various methods for software reliability analysis [65].”
From A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation (2000) · cites this paper as [65]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 15
- Clements P., August 23, 1983.
- 10.1109/TSE.1986.6312914 · DOI
- 10.1109/TSE.1980.230208 · DOI
- 10.1002/j.1538-7305.1981.tb00304.x · DOI
- 10.1109/TSE.1986.6312924 · DOI
- 10.1145/7474.7528 · DOI
- Mills H.D., 1987, COM- PASS '87--Computer Assurance
- 10.1145/360569.360659 · DOI
- Mills H.D., 1987, Inc.
- 10.1016/0164-1212(87)90015-X · DOI
- Mills H.D., 1979, Mass.
- Parker A., November 20, 1980.
- 10.1109/2.48796 · DOI
- 10.5555/9794.9800 · DOI
- Parnas D.L., 1985, Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Software Engineering
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation
Parasuraman, R., Sheridan, T. B., & Wickens, C. D. (2000) · IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans · doi:10.1109/3468.844354 · Cited by 4,195
Accountability in a computerized society
Nissenbaum, H. (1996) · Science and Engineering Ethics · doi:10.1007/bf02639315 · Cited by 346
Metadata
- Authors
- Parnas, D. L., van Schouwen, A. J., & Kwan, S. P.
- Affiliations
- Queen's University (CA)
- ORCID
- Parnas, David L.
- Venue
- Communications of the ACM
- Published
- 1990-06
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 636-648
- ISSN
- 0001-0782 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-7317
- OpenAlex
- W2039000785
- Cited by
- 333
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 51.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Communications of the ACM (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Science and Engineering Research Board
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Software › Software Reliability and Analysis Research
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality › Safety Systems Engineering in Autonomy
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Software › Software Testing and Debugging Techniques
- Keywords
- safety-critical software, software reliability, software trustworthiness, software testing, software evaluation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Evaluation of safety-critical software. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/78973.78974
- The paper
- Parnas, D. L., van Schouwen, A. J., & Kwan, S. P. (1990). Evaluation of safety-critical software. Communications of the ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/78973.78974
