The amendment will address misunderstandings on provisions for AI/ML by providing additional guidance and clarifications without changing the fundamental technical requirements and recommendations of the standard. The amendment and its limitation to broadly editorial changes is based on following considerations:
• Limited Standardization for AI: While AI/ML holds promise for various applications, current standardization efforts specific to AI/ML in safety-critical domains like railway are still in their early stages. This lack of mature and widely accepted standards for verifying and validating AI/ML systems in these contexts makes it challenging to reference or directly incorporate such technologies into the scope of EN 50716 (with less restrictive provisions) at this time.
• Promoting Flexibility and Innovation: By clarifying the existing provisions and adding guidance without imposing new requirements, the amendment allows for flexibility and encourages developers to explore the potential of AI/ML (where is safe to do so).
The following areas have already been identified by WG28 for the amendment:
• Explicitly remind the scope of Table A.3: State that the table's techniques and measures are primarily intended for the design of the software architecture for safety-related functions (e.g. does not strictly apply to support tools).
• Provide guidance on AI/ML usage: Explicitly acknowledge the potential of AI/ML in non-safety-critical areas and offer examples of possible applications (complementary to current recommendation for Basic Integrity, “-”, in Table A.3 for 13. Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning).
• Guidance on Support Tools: Ensure a consistent understanding of the AI/ML provisions related to support tools (& programming languages).
This represent current view on potential changes - other areas may be identified during the amendment drafting, keeping into account the above mentioned limitations to broadly editorial changes.
Required fields are indicated with *
