The first step in establishing the capability of an ADF is the definition of its ODD. ISO 34503 (ISO 34503:2023), describes key aspect of the safe use of automated vehicle technology is defining its capabilities and limitations while clearly communicating them to the user. Creating a list of coniderations may not cover all aspects, but it can serve as an initial step and help in ensuring that there are no critical omissions in the ODD requirements due to lack of information. This list, enriched by substantial experience, can be instrumental in guaranteeing safe operation in real-world scenarios. To effectively maintain and update the ODD considerations list over time, organizations should conduct regular reviews and establish a feedback loop with stakeholders. They should learn from incidents and stay updated with industry standards, best practices, and regulatory changes. It’s also beneficial to monitor market developments and provide ongoing training to the team.
Main Question
Is a checklist considering ODD requirements for the ADF defined?
Sub-Questions
- Are the ODD requirements for the specific ADF defined with respect to a standardised ODD taxonomy (e.g. appendix A of Thorn et al. 2018, ISO 34503:2023 and BSI/PAS 1883:2020)?
References
- BSI/PAS (2020) 1883: Operational Design Domain (ODD) taxonomy for an automated driving system (ADS) – Specification. Available at: https://www.bsigroup.com/globalassets/localfiles/en-gb/cav/pas1883.pdf (Accessed: 18 October 2023)
- ISO (2023) 34503: Road vehicles — Test scenarios for automated driving systems. Specification for operational design domains. Available at: https://www.iso.org/standard/78952.html (Accessed: 18 October 2023)