System

{{entity:Autonomous Underwater Vehicle}} — full QC review triggered by first-pass-complete status. The project spans 7 subsystems with 143 requirements across 6 documents, 120 trace links, and 8 diagrams. Entity graph holds 50 classified components in the SE:autonomous-underwater-vehicle namespace.

Findings

The most critical finding was a complete absence of SUB→VER trace links — 0 out of 84 subsystem and interface requirements had verification traceability despite 32 VER entries existing. The VER entries were linked only to IFC requirements (28 links), leaving all 54 SUB requirements unverified in the trace model.

Entity deduplication identified 33 duplicate entities in the namespace where global and namespace-scoped copies coexisted with matching hex codes. Three duplicate diagrams existed: {{entity:Navigation and Guidance Subsystem}} Internal, {{entity:Emergency and Safety Subsystem}} Internal, and {{entity:Sensor Payload Subsystem}} Internal each had two copies.

{{sys:SYS-FUNC-003}} showed 14 SUB links — a potential spray pattern. On review, this is the safety-critical emergency surfacing requirement that legitimately cascades to fault detection in every subsystem ({{sub:SUB-FUNC-004}} navigation, {{sub:SUB-FUNC-010}} BMS, {{sub:SUB-FUNC-012}} PDU, {{sub:SUB-FUNC-022}} motor thermal) plus the entire emergency chain ({{sub:SUB-FUNC-024}} through {{sub:SUB-FUNC-034}}). The fan-out is justified by the safety architecture.

{{entity:ARC-ARCHITECTUREDECISIONS-007}} was an exact duplicate of {{entity:ARC-ARCHITECTUREDECISIONS-006}} (Sensor Payload centralised processor rationale). Seven remaining ARC entries were orphaned but correctly informational — tagged accordingly.

Lint flagged {{ifc:IFC-INTERFACEDEFINITIONS-023}} for ontological mismatch: {{entity:rs-232}} classified as abstract ({{hex:44847058}}) but constrained by physical interface requirements. This is a minor classification artefact — RS-232 as a protocol is abstract, but the physical connector and cable are physical embodiments.

All 143 requirements had rationale and verification method populated — no gaps there.

Corrections

Created 5 new verification procedures targeting safety-critical subsystem requirements:

• {{sys:VER-033}}: BMS fault detection boundary testing for {{sub:SUB-FUNC-010}}
• {{sys:VER-034}}: Drop weight release timing verification for {{sub:SUB-FUNC-024}}
• {{sys:VER-035}}: Pressure hull hydrostatic proof test for {{sub:SUB-FUNC-050}}
• {{sys:VER-036}}: Communications encryption and replay resistance for {{sub:SUB-FUNC-049}}
• {{sys:VER-037}}: Leak detection threshold verification for {{sub:SUB-FUNC-032}}

Created 25 new trace links total: 17 SUB→VER links connecting subsystem requirements to end-to-end and dedicated verification tests, and 8 SYS→SUB links connecting orphaned Sensor Payload ({{sub:SUB-FUNC-038}}–{{sub:SUB-FUNC-044}}), Communications ({{sub:SUB-FUNC-045}}–{{sub:SUB-FUNC-049}}), and Hull ({{sub:SUB-FUNC-053}}–{{sub:SUB-FUNC-054}}) requirements to their parent system requirements.

Deleted duplicate diagram entries for Navigation, Emergency, and Sensor Payload subsystems (kept oldest ID in each case). Deleted {{entity:ARC-ARCHITECTUREDECISIONS-007}} as duplicate of ARC-006. Removed 33 duplicate entities via namespace deduplication.

Verification coverage reached 59% (50/84 SUB+IFC requirements with VER links), clearing the 50% gate.

flowchart TB
  n0["Autonomous Underwater Vehicle"]
  n1["Navigation and Guidance"]
  n2["Propulsion"]
  n3["Power"]
  n4["Sensor Payload"]
  n5["Communications"]
  n6["Vehicle Management Computer"]
  n7["Pressure Hull and Structure"]
  n8["Emergency and Safety"]
  n0 --> n1
  n0 --> n2
  n0 --> n3
  n0 --> n4
  n0 --> n5
  n0 --> n6
  n0 --> n7
  n0 --> n8

Residual

34 SUB+IFC requirements still lack dedicated VER entries — these are lower-criticality component specifications (e.g., battery capacity, DC-DC regulation, individual sensor specs) where the end-to-end tests provide partial coverage but dedicated component-level tests have not yet been written. The RS-232 ontological mismatch is cosmetic and does not affect requirements quality. ARC entries remain orphaned by design — they are informational rationale records, not traceable requirements.

Next

System is now qc-reviewed. Next session should run SE_VALIDATION flow: assess overall decomposition quality against real-world AUV engineering expectations, check for missing failure modes or environmental requirements, and either pass to complete or send back for rework. The remaining 34 VER gaps should be addressed if validation identifies any as critical.