1. Impacts of SoS on Software Development Gary Hafen Corporate Fellow, Software Engineering USC CSSE Workshop Integrating Systems and Software Engineering October 29, 2007

2. Situation Software is providing an increasing percentage of functionality in our systemsSoftware is providing an increasing percentage of functionality in our systems –Space Craft –Aircraft –Ships –Automobiles –Cell Phones –Etc.

3. Situation Systems are being networked to achieve capabilities beyond what individual systems alone can provideSystems are being networked to achieve capabilities beyond what individual systems alone can provide –System of Systems –Family of Systems –Global Information Grid –Communities of Interest

4. Ramification Monolithic System design methods and techniques won’t scale up to an asynchronous, loosely coupled, multi- node, system of systemsMonolithic System design methods and techniques won’t scale up to an asynchronous, loosely coupled, multi- node, system of systems –Does not hierarchically decompose functionally –Manage and minimize constraints vs. variables –Adaptive vs. conformal interface logic

5. Monolithic System Design Defined and Contained Scope of FunctionDefined and Contained Scope of Function Centralized controlCentralized control –Can design with hierarchical structure Deterministic BehaviorDeterministic Behavior –Desirable characteristic that is verified and validated Planned EvolutionPlanned Evolution –Controlled centrally Traditional Acquisition Process Works For These Systems

6. SoS Design Initially Defined Scope of FunctionInitially Defined Scope of Function –Not all requirements can be known Decentralized control of internal and external interfacesDecentralized control of internal and external interfaces –Architecture must be adaptive to uncontrolled interface changes Behavior EmergesBehavior Emerges –Cannot perform traditional Verification –Emerging behavior may be good or bad depending on objectives and constraints SoS Evolution is not controlled by a central authoritySoS Evolution is not controlled by a central authority –It Happens

7. Impact on Software - 1 Software Requirements Allocation is problematicSoftware Requirements Allocation is problematic –All requirements are not known –Software solutions must balance performance versus adaptability/flexibility –Functionality may need to be migrated between non- heterogeneous systems –Interfaces cannot be assured to be consistent or even present Functionality must adapt to external environmentFunctionality must adapt to external environment Creates a wider range of test conditionsCreates a wider range of test conditions Requirements Growth/Instability is a Traditional Software Risk

8. Impact on Software - 2 Software Architecture TechnologiesSoftware Architecture Technologies –Standards such as DoDAF, SoA, XML, CORBA are necessary –Adaptive, intelligent network awareness characteristics are now required –Exploitation of Expert Agent and Data Mining Technologies to achieve capability –Polymorphic Computing Architectures –Fault Containment/Tolerance to unplanned external stimulus Non-Determinism is Now an Asset

9. Impact on Software - 3 Implementation TechnologiesImplementation Technologies –Model Based Development –Auto-generation of code, test vectors –4 th or 5 th generation languages –Intelligent System composition tools –Performance and Quality of Service assurance

10. Impact on Software - 4 Test/Verification/ValidationTest/Verification/Validation –Non-deterministic functional operation –Uncontrolled Test Environment –Isolation of errors in shared SoS architecture space –Intelligent System validation Software AssuranceSoftware Assurance –Multiple Independent Levels of Security –Information Assurance in an Information Warfare environment –Cyber Attack

11. Summary A System of Systems cannot be defined, designed, developed, verified and validated by conventional system development processesA System of Systems cannot be defined, designed, developed, verified and validated by conventional system development processes What used to be considered design “gold plating” may now be mainstream thinkingWhat used to be considered design “gold plating” may now be mainstream thinking Controlling functional performance to a confined envelope of conditions is no longer feasibleControlling functional performance to a confined envelope of conditions is no longer feasible –Emergent behavior has to be evaluated as desirable or undesirable –Adaptive characteristics need to be included in requirements allocation With the lack of controlled behavior, continuous Software Assurance becomes a focused priority.With the lack of controlled behavior, continuous Software Assurance becomes a focused priority.