A Structured Argument for Assuring Safety of the Intended Functionality (SOTIF)

Abstract

Current safety standards for automated driving recommend the development of a safety case. This case aims to justify and critically evaluate, by means of an explicit argument and evidence, how the safety claims concerning the intended functionality of an automated driving feature are supported. However, little guidance exists on how such an argument could be developed. In this paper, the MISRA consortium proposes a state machine on which an argument concerning the safety of the intended functionality could be structured. By systematically covering the activation status of the automated driving feature within and outside the operational design domain, this state machine helps in exploring the conditions, and asserting the corresponding safety claims, under which hazardous events could be caused by the intended functionality. MISRA uses a Traffic Jam Drive feature to illustrate the application of this approach.