Comments on the contents of the dependability terminology standard

Aim. The long-lasting discussion of the dependability-related terminology is evidence of the relevance of the subject matter and, at the same time, identifies difficulties associated with finding middle-ground solutions. This article aims to eliminate the shortcomings associated with the application of the conventional, yet insufficiently substantiated terms in the GOST 27.002-2015 interstate standard. Correct understanding and use of terms are of great significance.Methods. The paper lays down the requirements for the used terminology in terms of internal logical consistency and identifies specific terms, the use of which violates such requirements. Several terms from the standard underwent a logical and terminological analysis based on statutory requirements and the semantic meanings of such terms.   Findings and conclusions. The paper states that the perfection of terms, definitions and basic concepts comes down to the fact that a standard shall not contain synonyms, homonyms and terms previously adopted in other standards with new or modified definitions. The terminological analysis helped to identify the terms whose use is unjustified. It was noted that the term “dependability” is clearly defined as a property, whose content and meaning are set forth with adequate substantiation. However, other definitions of dependability in the standard are not substantiated. Several cases of the use of terms that do not comply with the proposed requirements were considered, e.g., “dependability estimation”, “dependability indicators estimation”, “state of item”, etc.