Qualification and assurance boundary
Tool qualification does not transfer automatically across an import interface. The current Accemic status, the boundary, and the checks a project makes.
Tool qualification is based on the function a tool performs, the errors it could introduce or fail to detect, and the downstream activities that would detect those errors. It does not transfer automatically because one tool imports another tool’s output.
Current Accemic status
CEDARtools® is not currently supplied with a DO-330 or ISO 26262 tool-qualification package. Product outputs can be used within a project assurance strategy, but the intended use, required checks and remaining verification responsibilities must be defined by the project.
A typical integration boundary
Accemic products acquire trace, reconstruct execution, map observations and export named results. A downstream tool may import those results, combine them with other evidence and provide functions within its own qualified or certified scope. The interface between the systems remains an assurance boundary.
Checks at the boundary
A controlled integration should verify:
- producer and receiver versions;
- project and executable identity;
- obligation-set identity and unique mapping;
- record counts and completeness;
- status and denominator semantics;
- preservation of unresolved, excluded and supplemented obligations;
- integrity of transferred files; and
- rejection of missing, duplicated or incompatible data.
What a downstream qualification can and cannot cover
The receiving tool’s qualification material may support its handling of imported data within the supplier’s stated scope. It does not automatically establish the correctness of upstream trace acquisition, reconstruction, mapping or export. The project must identify how an error in each upstream function would be detected or otherwise controlled.
Project responsibility
The final tool-assurance argument belongs to the project using the tools. Accemic supplies interface specifications, verification evidence, version information and known limitations to support that argument.
Related: TESSY integration · TimeWeaver integration · standards
| Zone | Evidence carried | Owned by |
|---|---|---|
| Accemic functions (acquire · reconstruct · map · export) | supplier evidence for the released tool functions, per version | Accemic |
| Controlled interface | version, build ID, obligation IDs, counts, status semantics, integrity checks | checked on both sides at export and import |
| Downstream tool (import · combine / analyze · report) | its own supplier evidence and qualification scope | the tool vendor |
| Project assurance layer | the argument that the combined evidence is adequate for its use | the project |