On November 20, 2025, we hosted another Gate4SPICE event in Nuremberg in collaboration with iSyst Intelligente Systeme GmbH. The topic of this meeting touched on a key point in assessor practice: since the introduction of the Automotive Spice® Model 4.0, there has been confusion about two of the processes whose interpretation is multifaceted: VAL.1 and the required traceability of SWE.5 in the detailed design.
Our colleagues Sebastian Keller and Horst Kostal were also present and, together with Christos Ebert, one of the QA managers at Audi AG, and iSyst member Sebastian Dengler, provided valuable insights in technical presentations and discussions.
Christos Ebert (Audi AG) kicked off the event with a keynote speech in which he raised the question of how stakeholder requirements can be validated as part of a supplier assessment.
A key issue here is the identification of the “intended use.” This factor, which may grow over time, includes aspects of vehicle integration levels, field testing, management drives, and ultimately even homologation, in which suppliers may have to collaborate.
Sebastian Keller (Process Fellows) addressed the currently unclear point of what we refer to as “tri-directional traceability,” which requires a connection between SWE.5 and SWE.4 as well as the detailed design of both processes. An interpretation was ventured here, as the base practices in SWE.4 do not require this traceability either. Although SWE.5 refers to the detailed design in its purpose and in Base Practices BP2 and BP6, it is unclear how the detailed design can help with the verification of SW components.
Discussions were held to try to find common ground.
Sebastian Dengler (iSyst) addressed how test reports can serve as sufficient evidence in assessments. What does the PAM or the guideline expect, how does this correspond to everyday project work, and what about the question of sufficient communication, which could have an impact on subsequent processes?
In the afternoon, the participants worked in groups on specific examples: What are the advantages of participating in a VAL.1 process? What could the next steps be? How could an interpretation of the traceability of SWE.5 look if the software architecture consists of components that are also referred to as units? How can test reports be evaluated using case studies?
Finally, the groups presented their results. The conclusion: uncertainties remain, and we look forward with interest to a revision of Model 4.0. The intensive exchange once again demonstrated how important clarity and quality are in the specifications.
We would like to thank all participants for an exciting day with valuable input and lively discussion!
The results can be downloaded here on the intacs website (prior login required).
Would you like to learn more about Automotive Spice® 4.0? Feel free to contact us!!