Safety Argument
The Safety Argument block evaluates test results to assess the CCAM system’s safety through 4 interconnected sub-blocks:
- Coverage
The Coverage block examines test coverage from multiple perspectives, including parameter ranges in logical scenarios and Operational Design Domain (ODD) features. Iterative feedback loops identify conditions where the system fails (based on pass/fail criteria), enabling new concrete scenarios to be generated within the parameter space. ODD coverage is particularly critical, ensuring the system’s operational boundaries are thoroughly tested using diverse scenarios. - Test Evaluate
The Test Evaluate block assesses individual test executions to determine whether the system meets safety requirements, such as maintaining speed limits or avoiding collisions. Results from both the Coverage and Test Evaluate blocks might result in iterative refinements of scenarios until coverage thresholds are achieved. - Safety Case
The Safety Case block supports manufacturers in demonstrating that a CCAM system meets legal safety requirements by compiling structured evidence including test results, safety arguments and risk estimates. It addresses relevant external requirements (like those of regulations, standards or NCAP protocols), and includes the validation of methods, tools and data used, forming a transparent foundation for safety assessment and deployment readiness of a CCAM system.
- Decide
The Decide block serves as the culmination of the safety assurance performance, where all outputs generated in the Coverage and Test Evaluate blocks are integrated into a clear and final decision: whether the system can be considered safe enough for approval and deployment (or not). This decision is expressed as a binary outcome —pass or fail— regardless of the complexity and variability of preceding evaluation metrics.
In summary, the Safety Argument block ensures systematic evaluation, iterative refinement, and comprehensive safety assurance of a CCAM system under test.