This is an old revision of the document!


Summary

This chapter has provided an overviews of autonomous systems (ground, airborne, marine, space), the initial framing of expectation functions for autonomy, the governance structures into which autonomy must operate, an overview of the validation and verification mechanisms used to support these governance structures, and finally an overview of autonomy in each of the physical domains.

In the subsequent chapters, we will delve deeper into these topics with a framing informed by autonomy abstractions as shown in the figure below. At the “bottom” of these abstractions are the physical objects such as the mechanical devices and the associated electronics hardware. Layered above the electronics hardware layer are various software layers which start with middleware/infrastructure, algorithmic layers, and finally the connection to humans.

These topics will be addressed at the conceptual level and also examined in specific fashion for the four physical domains (example figure below).

Productization Lessons and Assessments:

Key lessons for productization include:

  1. Engineers must understand their products operate inside a governance structure consisting of laws, regulations, and standards.
  2. In the case of autonomy, there are many historical standards, but standard development is also under development.
  3. 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 and Companies:

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, NASA, ESA
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, ISO, IEEE, RTCA, ASTM
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
en/safeav/as/summary.1777013780.txt.gz · Last modified: by raivo.sell
CC Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International
www.chimeric.de Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki do yourself a favour and use a real browser - get firefox!! Recent changes RSS feed Valid XHTML 1.0