Arc Skills / Verification and validation
Select a verification method for a requirement
Arc Skills compares an obligation with inspection, analysis, demonstration, and test capabilities. It returns a primary method, any justified supplement, required evidence, and assumptions that could invalidate the choice.
Use this skill
Use Arc Skills to select verification methods for the supplied requirements.
Inputs:
- Exact requirement revisions and acceptance boundaries
- Available articles, models, facilities, and limiting conditions
- Project verification level, stage, and method policy
Return a method decision table with decisive observable, article level, planned artifact, and open assumption.
Choose the least burdensome method that establishes the full obligation; justify any supplemental methodWhat you provide and what you get
| What you have | How it is used | What you get |
|---|---|---|
| Requirement wording | Identifies physical or performance observable | Method candidate |
| Article and facilities | Shows what evidence can be obtained | Level and model choice |
| Verification policy | Constrains accepted method and stage | Plan-ready rationale |
Connector count versus link throughput
Illustrative engineering example.
Two requirements demand different evidence. A physical connector is available for count inspection; the radio must demonstrate packet delivery at its specified maximum range.
R-7: Connector J1 shall have 24 contacts.
R-8: The link shall deliver packets at ≥10 Mb/s at maximum specified range.
Connector flight-like unit available; maximum range definition [not supplied].| Requirement | Primary method and artifact | Why / open assumption |
|---|---|---|
| R-7 | Inspection: controlled drawing plus contact count on intended connector | Direct physical count decides 24; confirm article revision. |
| R-8 | Test: received throughput data at approved maximum-range condition | Measures delivered packets; range definition and link setup open. |
| R-8 supplement | Analysis only if validated link model and input evidence are approved | A nominal short-range demonstration cannot decide the full claim. |
R-7 is a discrete visible property; an elaborate performance test would add no useful evidence. R-8 is a quantitative end-to-end performance claim, so the receiver’s data under the limiting condition matters.
The table does not mark both Test and Analysis as automatically required. Analysis is a possible supplement if the maximum-range setup is impractical and the project accepts validated model evidence.
Choose evidence that decides the claim
- Identify the exact observable and pass boundary for each requirement.
- Select a method that can expose a plausible failure under the required conditions.
- Specify article, verification level, and intended evidence artifact.
- Add a supplemental method only for a clause the primary method cannot establish.
Questions about this task
Can inspection verify throughput?
No. It can confirm hardware features, but it cannot measure delivered packet rate at maximum range.
What if maximum range is undefined?
The method can be tentatively Test, but the test condition and final plan remain blocked until the range is approved.
Sources and further reading
- NASA Systems Engineering Handbook: Lifecycle and requirements guidance; the example decisions are illustrative.