View TRAK:MV-04


Assurance View


Part of the TRAK Management Perspective and one of the 24 TRAK architecture views.


Describes a claim made about any other element with supporting (or opposing) arguments and evidence to establish how and whether a claim is proved or disproved. (as a result of the assessed evidence).

Typical claims for solutions include that a system is safe, fit for purpose and meets its requirements.

Covered by TRAK IPR and licenses


Conforms to the MVp-04 Assurance Viewpoint

Tool Support

Sparx Enterprise Architect

Applications or Uses

Describing situations where claims are made:-

  • That something meets one or more requirements:
    • the enterprise, a concept,  a design of product or organisation, a project or a normative document
    • product assurance, design certification, type approval or type registration
  • That something is safe:
    • safety (assurance) case
    • structured set of arguments based on and linked to the architecture of the product and/or organisation
  • Putting forwards an opposing or different claim to an existing one.

Structuring and agreeing a set of arguments to support or oppose a claim.

Presenting evidence that supports or opposes arguments made and which therefore aims to prove or disprove a claim made.

Verification of the design of a system is a responsibility of a Design Authority.


The MV-04 is the master architecture view for Claim, Argument and Evidence.

The supporting (opposing) parts of an Argument or Evidence by inference also support the Claim or Argument respectively to which the top-most ‘whole’ Argument or Evidence is connected. The part Arguments or part Evidences may also support other Argument or Evidence elements.

A counter-claim is established using ‘Claim opposes Claim’.

A counter-argument is established using ‘Argument opposes Argument’ (and is usually followed by (same) Argument opposes Claim).

When the ‘acceptance date’ attribute of a Claim, Argument or Evidence element is non-null and valid (not in the future) that element is deemed to have been accepted by the assessor of the claim.

Claims can be made against any element in any TRAK perspective. Claims can be made against a concept, the enterprise and its capabilities and goals, against a system and its ability to realise these capabilities. Claims can also be made against a project, its structure or activities (and thence against the introduction or removal from service of a system). Claims can also be made against standards or against a contract and its requirements.

Applied to the solution perspective this view supports the creation of a structured safety argument (“safety case”). It can also be used for design verification against the requirements for the design where there is a set of claims that the design meets these requirements. In this sense it could be used to describe how the organisation’s processes meet a set of external normative requirements (‘Standards’ in TRAK).

Covered by TRAK IPR and licenses




© 2010 Eclectica Systems Ltd.