Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision | |||
| en:safeav:as:summary [2026/04/24 09:56] – raivo.sell | en:safeav:as:summary [2026/04/24 10:08] (current) – tables moved to appendixes raivo.sell | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
| {{: | {{: | ||
| - | |||
| - | **Productization Lessons and Assessments: | ||
| - | |||
| - | Key lessons for productization include: | ||
| - | |||
| - | - Engineers must understand their products operate inside a governance structure consisting of laws, regulations, | ||
| - | - In the case of autonomy, there are many historical standards, but standard development is also under development. | ||
| - | - A very key aspect of product design is the expectation function for the product. This expectation function is key to communication from a marketing perspective and also from a legal liability perspective. | ||
| - | |||
| - | ^ Domain ^ Primary Standards Body ^ Key Autonomy Standard ^ | ||
| - | | Ground | SAE | SAE J3016 | | ||
| - | | Ground | ISO | ISO 26262, ISO 21448 | | ||
| - | | Ground | UNECE | UN R157 | | ||
| - | | Airborne | RTCA | DO-178C, DO-365 | | ||
| - | | Airborne | FAA/EASA | UAV autonomy certification | | ||
| - | | Marine | IMO | MASS autonomy levels | | ||
| - | | Marine | DNV | Autonomous ship standards | | ||
| - | | Space | NASA | ALFUS autonomy framework | | ||
| - | | Space | CCSDS | Spacecraft autonomy protocols | | ||
| - | | Cross-domain | IEEE | IEEE 7000 series | | ||
| - | | Cross-domain | IEC | IEC 61508 | | ||
| - | | Cross-domain | NIST | AI Risk Management Framework | | ||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | Industries | ||
| - | |||
| - | ^ Type ^ Description ^ Example Players (Companies / Organizations) ^ | ||
| - | | Regulators & Government Agencies | Define laws, certification pathways, and operational constraints for autonomous systems across domains (ground, air, marine, space). They translate legislation into enforceable rules and approvals. | NHTSA, FAA, EASA, International Maritime Organization, | ||
| - | | Standards Organizations / Industry Consortia | Develop technical standards, safety frameworks, and autonomy classification systems that regulators and industry rely on (e.g., SAE levels, ISO safety standards). | SAE International, | ||
| - | | Legal & Advisory Firms | Interpret liability, compliance, and regulatory frameworks; support litigation, risk assessment, and policy strategy for autonomy deployments. | Baker McKenzie, DLA Piper, Latham & Watkins | | ||
| - | | Certification & Testing Authorities | Provide independent validation, certification audits, and compliance verification against safety standards (ASIL, DAL, etc.). Critical for market entry. | TÜV SÜD, UL Solutions, DNV | | ||
| - | | Simulation & Digital Twin Software Providers | Provide tools for scenario-based validation, digital twins, and V&V workflows across autonomy stacks (SIL/HIL, scenario generation, formal testing). | NVIDIA (DRIVE Sim), MathWorks, Ansys, Siemens | | ||
| - | | Test Track & Physical Testing Infrastructure Providers | Operate controlled environments for real-world validation (proving grounds, UAV corridors, maritime test ranges). Bridge sim-to-real validation. | American Center for Mobility, MCity, FAA UAV Test Sites | | ||
