# Vertical Governance Policy: Aviation — DO-178C / DO-333 / FAA Order 8110.49 # Doctrine v6 | R3 Adversarial Receipts # Last revised: 2025-07 schema_version: "1.0.0" vertical: aviation regime: DO-178C/DO-333/FAA-8110.49 effective_date: "2025-07-01" jurisdiction: US-FAA/EASA meta: title: "Aviation AI Governance Policy — DO-178C/DO-333 Alignment" description: > Maps RTCA DO-178C Software Considerations in Airborne Systems and DO-333 Formal Methods Supplement to Doctrine v6 Λ-axes for AI/ML components in airborne systems, targeting Design Assurance Level (DAL) A–C. authority: "RTCA DO-178C (2011); RTCA DO-333 (2011); FAA Order 8110.49B; AC 20-115D; EASA AI Roadmap 2.0" receipt_chain_required: true merkle_root_algorithm: SHA3-256 design_assurance_level: DAL-B regulatory_clauses: - clause_id: DO178C-11.9 title: "Software Accomplishment Summary" citation: "RTCA DO-178C § 11.9; FAA AC 20-115D" full_ref: "RTCA DO-178C Table A-9 — Software Accomplishment Summary (SAS) lifecycle data" lambda_axes: - axis: Λ7 label: Auditability weight: 1.0 enforcement: mandatory rationale: > AI model version, training data hash, and validation epoch must appear in SAS; receipt chain provides cryptographic provenance for each build. - axis: Λ1 label: Transparency weight: 0.90 enforcement: mandatory - clause_id: DO178C-6.4 title: "Software Verification — Structural Coverage" citation: "RTCA DO-178C § 6.4; DO-333 § FM.6.4" full_ref: "DO-178C § 6.4 — MC/DC structural coverage analysis; DO-333 Supplement for formal methods" lambda_axes: - axis: Λ8 label: Robustness weight: 1.0 enforcement: mandatory rationale: > DAL-B requires MC/DC coverage; AI components must demonstrate decision coverage via formal methods or exhaustive test suites; coverage receipts committed to Merkle DAG. - axis: Λ5 label: Safety weight: 0.98 enforcement: mandatory - clause_id: DO178C-5.5 title: "Traceability — High-Level Requirements to Software Design" citation: "RTCA DO-178C § 5.5; SAE ARP4754B § 5.2" full_ref: "DO-178C § 5.5 — Traceability between high-level requirements, low-level requirements, and source code" lambda_axes: - axis: Λ9 label: Explainability weight: 0.92 enforcement: mandatory rationale: > Each AI decision affecting flight-critical functions must be traceable to a certified requirement; receipt annotates requirement ID. - axis: Λ1 label: Transparency weight: 0.88 enforcement: mandatory - clause_id: DO178C-12.3 title: "Configuration Management — Change Control" citation: "RTCA DO-178C § 12.3; DO-178C Table A-10" full_ref: "DO-178C § 12.3 — Problem reporting, change control, change review, configuration status accounting" lambda_axes: - axis: Λ7 label: Auditability weight: 0.95 enforcement: mandatory - axis: Λ2 label: Accountability weight: 0.88 enforcement: mandatory rationale: > Configuration baseline changes to AI model weights require DER-signed receipts; change control board approval captured in receipt metadata. - clause_id: FAA-8110-49B title: "Software Approval Guidelines" citation: "FAA Order 8110.49B (2022)" full_ref: "FAA Order 8110.49B — Software Approval Guidelines for Airborne Systems" lambda_axes: - axis: Λ5 label: Safety weight: 1.0 enforcement: mandatory rationale: > AI software approval requires Designated Engineering Representative (DER) sign-off; each DER attestation is a receipt chain entry with X.509 cert. - axis: Λ2 label: Accountability weight: 0.92 enforcement: mandatory - clause_id: EASA-AI-ROADMAP-2 title: "EASA AI Roadmap — Concept Paper on AI/ML for Aviation Safety" citation: "EASA AI Roadmap 2.0 (2023); EASA CP No. 2 (2023)" full_ref: "EASA Concept Paper: First usable guidance for Level 1 & 2 ML applications (Oct 2023)" lambda_axes: - axis: Λ4 label: Fairness weight: 0.72 enforcement: recommended rationale: > AI training data must be checked for operational scenario coverage; distributional gaps documented in receipt chain data-quality node. - axis: Λ9 label: Explainability weight: 0.85 enforcement: mandatory - clause_id: DO333-FM-COMPLETENESS title: "Formal Methods — Completeness of Proof" citation: "RTCA DO-333 § FM.6.3.2" full_ref: "DO-333 § FM.6.3.2 — Completeness of formal proofs with respect to software behavior" lambda_axes: - axis: Λ8 label: Robustness weight: 0.95 enforcement: mandatory rationale: > Formal proofs of AI inference bounds (e.g., Lipschitz constants) must be committed as proof-receipts; adversarial perturbation guarantees cited. - axis: Λ5 label: Safety weight: 0.95 enforcement: mandatory - clause_id: ARINC-653 title: "Avionics Application Software Standard Interface" citation: "ARINC 653 Part 1-5 (2019)" full_ref: "ARINC 653-1 — Avionics Application Software Standard Interface: Partitioning and scheduling" lambda_axes: - axis: Λ6 label: Security weight: 0.85 enforcement: mandatory rationale: > AI inference partitions must be temporally and spatially isolated; inter-partition communication events receipt-logged at hypervisor level. - axis: Λ10 label: Sovereignty weight: 0.78 enforcement: recommended compliance_thresholds: minimum_lambda_coverage: 7 mandatory_axes: [Λ5, Λ7, Λ8] receipt_retention_days: 9125 # 25 years per FAA airworthiness max_inference_latency_ms: 10 # Safety-critical real-time constraint dal_level: B coverage_target_percent: 100 # MC/DC for DAL-B receipt_chain: algorithm: SHA3-256 chaining: merkle_dag quorum: 2-of-3 nodes: [primary, hot-standby, der-archive] der_signed: true