Search Results

Safety assurance is a central concern for the development and societal acceptance of automated driving (AD) systems. Perception is a key aspect of AD that relies heavily on Machine Learning (ML). Despite the known challenges with the safety assurance of ML-based components, proposals have recently emerged for unit-level safety cases addressing these components. Unfortunately, AD safety cases express safety requirements at the system level and these efforts are missing the critical linking argument needed to integrate safety requirements at the system level with component performance requirements at the unit level. In this paper, we propose the Integration Safety Case for Perception (ISCaP), a generic template for such a linking safety argument specifically tailored for perception components. The template takes a deductive and formal approach to define strong traceability between levels.

Machine learning (ML) plays an ever-increasing role in advanced automotive functionality for driver assistance and autonomous operation; however, its adequacy from the perspective of safety certification remains controversial. In this paper, we analyze the impacts that the use of ML within software has on the ISO 26262 safety lifecycle and ask what could be done to address them. We then provide a set of recommendations on how to adapt the standard to better accommodate ML.