Repository navigation
Roadmap and status
Four phases. Status is taken from what exists in the repository: "draft" means the work product is written but not reviewed, and nothing is called complete before its review. This table mirrors the roadmap in the README; a status changes here only when the owning work product changes its document-control header.
| Phase | State |
|---|---|
| 1 · Foundation | Active |
| 2 · Safety engineering | Active |
| 3 · Implementation and verification | Planned |
| 4 · Expanded assurance | Planned |
| Phase | Work | Status |
|---|---|---|
| 1 · Foundation | Project governance and safety plan | Draft |
| Upstream baseline gap assessment | Draft | |
| Assurance data model and traceability data | Draft; hazards, goals, assumptions and safety case recorded, requirements not yet | |
| 2 · Safety engineering | Hazard analysis and functional safety concept | Draft |
| SOTIF analysis, cybersecurity analysis, AI safety requirements | Draft | |
| Architecture analysis: technical safety concept, FTA and FMEA, dependent failure analysis, STPA | Draft | |
| Field monitoring, safety anomaly and root cause process; first case FI-2026-001 (NHTSA PE26007) | Draft | |
| 3 · Implementation and verification | Safety mechanisms from the technical safety requirements | Planned |
| ISO 26262-6 software lifecycle (Clauses 5 to 11) | Specified; starts after the Part 2 to 4 work products and supporting processes are approved | |
| Automated verification of the inherited safety code: unit tests, coverage gate, MISRA, mutation | Running in CI; not yet reviewed as evidence | |
| Regression testing, simulation, fault injection, evidence generation | Specified, not executed | |
| 4 · Expanded assurance | More evaluated configurations, independent review, living safety-case maturity, continuous assurance, community contributions | Planned |
Figure 5-1 of WP-M-03 project plan, generated by fig_m_management.py and checked by CI.
Phase 3 starts when the Part 2 to 4 work products and the supporting processes have passed confirmation review (WP-P-05). Until then every claim in the safety case stays at zero accepted evidence by design: evidence is recorded first and accepted only after independent review. The gates themselves are defined in the project plan, and the questions that still wait on the project lead are in the decision register.
- README, Roadmap
- WP-M-00 work product register: every work product, its revision and status
- WP-M-03 project plan: phases and gates
Mirrored from wiki/ on liondriver-dev at 7a1aec4, 2026-11-04. Pages are reviewed by pull request; the wiki is not edited in place. This wiki explains and links; safety claims and evidence live in the assurance record.
LionDriver wiki
- Home
- Roadmap and status
- How LionDriver works
- How the repository is organized
- How decisions are made
- Glossary
- What is a safety case?
- Reading the Living Safety Case
- Standards at a glance
- From hazard to test
- Deriving and writing safety requirements
- ASIL decomposition
- Building a fault tree
- Hardware safety and interference
- After release (ISO 26262 Part 7)
- SOTIF and ISO 26262
- Cybersecurity and ISO/SAE 21434
- AI safety and ISO/PAS 8800
- ASPICE: is the process capable?
- Integrated standards: one system, not five
- For the assessor
- Reference vehicle
- CAN, CAN FD and end-to-end protection
- Contributor guide
- Reporting a safety concern
- Session log
- FAQ
Repository