A Taxonomy to Unify Fault Tolerance Regimes for Automotive Systems: Defining Fail-Operational, Fail-Degraded, and Fail-Safe
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
This paper presents a taxonomy that allows defining the fault tolerance regimes fail-operational, fail-degraded, and fail-safe in the context of automotive systems. Fault tolerance regimes such as these are widely used in recent publications related to automated driving, yet without definitions. This largely holds true for automotive safety standards, too. We show that fault tolerance regimes defined in scientific publications related to the automotive domain are partially ambiguous as well as taxonomically unrelated. The presented taxonomy is based on terminology stemming from ISO 26262 as well as from systems engineering. It uses four criteria to distinguish fault tolerance regimes. In addition to fail-operational, fail-degraded, and fail-safe, the core terminology consists of operational and fail-unsafe. These terms are supported by definitions of available performance, nominal performance, functionality, and a concise definition of the safe state. For verification, we show by means of two examples from the automotive domain that the taxonomy can be applied to hierarchical systems of different complexity.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 21 Jun 2021.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 0; 2025: 0; 2026: 1.
2 papers.
- 2026Image Quality Dependent Degradation for AI Systems28 Jul 2026
- 2023WATonoBus: Field-Tested All-Weather Autonomous Shuttle Technology1 Dec 2023