And like Demos, Praxis is a flexible and legible typeface that works well in small point sizes and on low-quality paper (office documents, newsletters, newspapers, etc.). The word 'Praxis' comes from Greek, and means 'a practical application.' To show hidden files and folders in Mac OS there are two methods as discussed below. Keystroke (Mac OS 10.12.4 or later) Press Shift + Cmd +. Pressing the same key combination again.

1. Praxis Osterholz Ludwigsburg
2. Praxis Mac Os X

Home > HCAS > HCAS_PUBS > HCAS_JOURNALS > TQR Home > TQR > Vol. 25 > No. 13 (2020)

Abstract

Purpose - This paper demonstrates the limited efficacy procedural ethics has for qualitative research. Ethics committee’s instructions have a short shelf life given the research question qualitative researchers create is volatile; that is, likely to change due to the inductive, emergent, informant-led nature of qualitative research. Design - This article draws on extensive literature to examine the void between the original research design and the messy reality experienced in the field. We focus on how researchers can practice ethically by recognizing the need for agile and responsive ethics praxis in their work. Findings - This practice describes the researcher, recognizing the initial support from an ethics committee and its limitations, but as the research gets underway assuming full responsibility for ethical considerations that emerge in the field. Practical implications - Researchers’ responsibilities entail recognising the dual faces of confidentiality; distinguishing external confidentiality from internal confidentiality. Other responsibilities in post procedural ethics include recognising and addressing what Guillemin and Gillam label big ethical moments and addressing these in different ways. Originality/value - At times, participants and researchers’ ethical protections are insufficient to deal with the unforeseen, requiring on the spot ethical reasoning and decision-making. Being prepared for and capable of ethics praxis is therefore crucial. Researchers should also assume they may find themselves at personal risk (physically, emotionally, reputationally) and in anticipation of that they should create a safety plan. Most importantly, the changeable nature of practicing ethical research requires researchers to establish a reference group that can provide impartial advice and guidance enhancing the ethical practice.

Keywords

Internal Confidentiality, Process Consent, Anonymity, Reference Groups

Author Bio(s)

Martin Tolich’s (0000-0002-0208-9315) first degrees were from Auckland University and his Ph.D. in Sociology was from University of California, Davis. He is currently Associate Professor in Sociology at Otago University, New Zealand. Martin has authored and co-authored numerous books on Research Methods and Research Ethics for Pearson, Oxford University Press, Routledge and Sage. His latest books were Planning Ethically Responsible Research (with Sieber), the Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research Ethics (with Ron Iphofen), Public Sociology Capstone: Non-Neoliberal Alternatives to Internships, and Social Science Research in New Zealand (with Davidson). His forthcoming book with Routledge is Finding Your Ethical Self: A Guidebook for Novice Qualitative Researchers. He has served on ethics committees for over twenty years and in 2008 founded a not-for-profit independent New Zealand Ethics Committee. In 2012, he gained a blue-sky three year Marsden Grant from the Royal Society of New Zealand to study tensions around ethics review.

Emma Tumilty (0000-0002-4132-6467) is a Bioethicist and Lecturer at the School of Medicine, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia. She completed a PhD in Bioethics at Otago University and Postdoctoral Fellowship in the Institute of Translational Sciences at the University of Texas Medical Branch. Her research interests span both clinical ethics and research ethics, where she is interested in issues of justice, power relations, and feminist approaches. In the area of research ethics she focuses both on what is involved in practicing ethically as a researcher and what is required for research ethics review to be effective and meaningful. Her research is informed by her previous work on ethics review committees in New Zealand and the U.S.A., providing research ethics consultation services, and her experiences as an empirical researcher. She is the book review editor for the International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics and an Associate Editor for Progress in Community Health Partnership Journal.

Acknowledgements

An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 4th World Conference on Qualitative Research (WCQR2019) in Oporto, Portugal, October 16th to 18th 2019. https://2019.wcqr.info/world-conference-on-qualitative-research/

Publication Date

12-4-2020

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 International License.

Recommended APA Citation

Tolich, M., & Tumilty, E. (2020). Practicing Ethics and Ethics Praxis. The Qualitative Report, 25(13), 16-30. Retrieved from https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol25/iss13/3

Included in

Quantitative, Qualitative, Comparative, and Historical Methodologies Commons, Social Statistics Commons

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.

SPARK is a formally definedcomputerprogramming language based on the Ada programming language, intended for the development of high integrity software used in systems where predictable and highly reliable operation is essential. It facilitates the development of applications that demand safety, security, or business integrity.

Originally, there were three versions of the SPARK language (SPARK83, SPARK95, SPARK2005) based on Ada 83, Ada 95 and Ada 2005 respectively.

A fourth version of the SPARK language, SPARK 2014, based on Ada 2012, was released on April 30, 2014. SPARK 2014 is a complete re-design of the language and supporting verification tools.

The SPARK language consists of a well-defined subset of the Ada language that uses contracts to describe the specification of components in a form that is suitable for both static and dynamic verification.

In SPARK83/95/2005, the contracts are encoded in Ada comments and so are ignored by any standard Ada compiler, but are processed by the SPARK 'Examiner' and its associated tools.

SPARK 2014, in contrast, uses Ada 2012's built-in 'aspect' syntax to express contracts, bringing them into the core of the language. The main tool for SPARK 2014 (GNATprove) is based on the GNAT/GCC infrastructure, and re-uses almost the entirety of the GNAT Ada 2012 front-end.

Technical overview[edit]

SPARK utilises the strengths of Ada while trying to eliminate all its potential ambiguities and insecure constructs. SPARK programs are by design meant to be unambiguous, and their behavior is required to be unaffected by the choice of Ada compiler. These goals are achieved partly by omitting some of Ada's more problematic features (such as unrestricted parallel tasking) and partly by introducing contracts which encode the application designer's intentions and requirements for certain components of a program.

The combination of these approaches allows SPARK to meet its design objectives, which are:

• logical soundness
• rigorous formal definition
• simple semantics
• security
• bounded resource (space and time) requirements.
• minimal runtime system requirements

Contract examples[edit]

Consider the Ada subprogram specification below:

In pure Ada this might increment the variable X by one or one thousand; or it might set some global counter to X and return the original value of the counter in X; or it might do absolutely nothing with X at all.

With SPARK 2014, contracts are added to the code to provide additional information regarding what a subprogram actually does. For example, we may alter the above specification to say:

This specifies that the Increment procedure does not use (neither update nor read) any global variable and that the only data item used in calculating the new value of X is X itself.

Alternatively, the designer might specify:

This specifies that Increment will use the global variable Count in the same package as Increment, that the exported value of Count depends on the imported values of Count and X, and that the exported value of X does not depend on any variables at all and it will be derived from constant data only.

If GNATprove is then run on the specification and corresponding body of a subprogram, it will analyse the body of the subprogram to build up a model of the information flow. This model is then compared against that which has been specified by the annotations and any discrepancies reported to the user.

These specifications can be further extended by asserting various properties that either need to hold when a subprogram is called (preconditions) or that will hold once execution of the subprogram has completed (postconditions). For example, we could say the following:

This, now, specifies not only that X is derived from itself alone, but also that before Increment is called X must be strictly less than the last possible value of its type and that afterwards X will be equal to the initial value of X plus one.

Verification conditions[edit]

GNATprove can also generate a set of verification conditions or VCs. These conditions are used to establish whether certain properties hold for a given subprogram. At a minimum, the GNATprove will generate VCs to establish that all run-time errors cannot occur within a subprogram, such as:

• array index out of range
• type range violation
• division by zero
• numerical overflow.

If a postcondition or any other assertion is added to a subprogram, GNATprove will also generate VCs that require the user to show that these properties hold for all possible paths through the subprogram.

Praxis Osterholz Ludwigsburg

Under the hood, GNATprove uses the Why3 intermediate language and VC Generator, and the CVC4, Z3, and Alt-Ergo theorem provers to discharge VCs. Use of other provers (including interactive proof checkers) is also possible through other components of the Why3 toolset.

History[edit]

The first version of SPARK (based on Ada 83) was produced at the University of Southampton (with UK Ministry of Defence sponsorship) by Bernard Carré and Trevor Jennings. Subsequently the language was progressively extended and refined, first by Program Validation Limited and then by Praxis Critical Systems Limited. In 2004, Praxis Critical Systems Limited changed its name to Praxis High Integrity Systems Limited. In January 2010, the company became Altran Praxis.

In early 2009, Praxis formed a partnership with AdaCore, and released 'SPARK Pro' under the terms of the GPL. This was followed in June 2009 by the SPARK GPL Edition 2009, aimed at the FOSS and academic communities.

In June 2010, Altran-Praxis announced that the SPARK programming language would be used in the software of US Lunar project CubeSat, expected to be completed in 2015.

In January 2013, Altran-Praxis changed its name to Altran.

The first Pro release of SPARK 2014 was announced on April 30, 2014, and was quickly followed by the SPARK 2014 GPL edition, aimed at the FLOSS and academic communities.

Industrial applications[edit]

Safety-related systems[edit]

SPARK has been used in several high profile safety-critical systems, covering commercial aviation (Rolls-Royce Trent series jet engines, the ARINC ACAMS system, the Lockheed Martin C130J), military aviation (EuroFighter Typhoon, Harrier GR9, AerMacchi M346), air-traffic management (UK NATS iFACTS system), rail (numerous signalling applications), medical (the LifeFlow ventricular assist device), and space applications (the Vermont Technical College CubeSat project).

Security-related systems[edit]

SPARK has also been used in secure systems development. Users include Rockwell Collins (Turnstile and SecureOne cross-domain solutions), the development of the original MULTOS CA, the NSA Tokeneer demonstrator, the secunet multi-level workstation, the Muen separation kernel and Genode block-device encrypter.

In August 2010, Rod Chapman, principal engineer of Altran Praxis, implemented Skein, one of candidates for SHA-3, in SPARK. In comparing the performance of the SPARK and C implementations and after careful optimization, he managed to have the SPARK version run only about 5 to 10% slower than C. Later improvement to the Ada middle-end in GCC (implemented by Eric Botcazou of AdaCore) closed the gap, with the SPARK code matching the C in performance exactly.^[1]

See also[edit]

Notes[edit]

1. ^Handy, Alex (August 24, 2010). 'Ada-derived Skein crypto shows SPARK'. SD Times. BZ Media LLC. Retrieved 2010-08-31.CS1 maint: discouraged parameter (link)

References[edit]

• John Barnes (2012). SPARK: The Proven Approach to High Integrity Software. Altran Praxis. ISBN978-0-9572905-1-8.
• John W. McCormick and Peter C. Chapin (2015). Building High Integrity Applications with SPARK 2014. Cambridge University Press. ISBN978-1-107-65684-0.
• Philip E. Ross (September 2005). 'The Exterminators'. IEEE Spectrum. 42 (9): 36–41. doi:10.1109/MSPEC.2005.1502527. ISSN0018-9235.

Praxis Mac Os X

External links[edit]