Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "Automotive Safety Integrity Level" in English language version.
The risk score for some potentially hazardous situation is given numerically as the product of three factors: ...
The ISO 26262 standard defines the three risk parameters in a qualitative way that leaves room for interpretation.
The main difference between the ISO ASILs and IEC 61508 SIL is that the latter employ quantitative target probability measures while the ASILs are based on qualitative measures. .... In MISRA guidelines and ISO 262 this possibility is taken into account by means of a qualitative measure known as 'controllability'.
These [quantitative methods] state a maximal frequency of occurrence, rather than a mainly qualitative integrity target as in ISO 26262.
These state a maximal frequency of occurrence, rather than a mainly qualitative integrity target as in ISO 26262.
...then the minimum requirement from ISO 26262 regarding safety analyses is to conduct a qualitative analysis (i.e. no need to calculate with failure probabilities ....
In the area of functional safety, standards such as ISO 26262 assess safety mainly focusing on qualitative assessment techniques ...
{{cite book}}: |magazine= ignored (help)The additional level, QM, stands for Quality Management and denotes non-hazardous items that require only standard quality management compliance.
Other variations include the use of "ASILs" (Automotive Safety Integrity Levels) which are derived differently, with ASIL being a qualitative measurement of risk.
The derivation of the SIL is covered in more detail in part 5 of the [61508] standard, "Examples of methods for the determination of safety integrity levels" which explains different quantitative approaches to the derivation of SILs.