CN115878224A - Confidence evaluation method and evaluation device for functional safety parameter calibration tool - Google Patents
Confidence evaluation method and evaluation device for functional safety parameter calibration tool Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- CN115878224A CN115878224A CN202211723283.3A CN202211723283A CN115878224A CN 115878224 A CN115878224 A CN 115878224A CN 202211723283 A CN202211723283 A CN 202211723283A CN 115878224 A CN115878224 A CN 115878224A
- Authority
- CN
- China
- Prior art keywords
- functional safety
- parameter calibration
- hex
- file
- hex file
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Withdrawn
Links
- 238000011156 evaluation Methods 0.000 title claims abstract description 33
- 238000000034 method Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 25
- 238000001514 detection method Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 16
- 230000008859 change Effects 0.000 claims description 13
- 230000008569 process Effects 0.000 description 11
- 238000011161 development Methods 0.000 description 5
- 230000007246 mechanism Effects 0.000 description 5
- 230000009471 action Effects 0.000 description 3
- 238000012544 monitoring process Methods 0.000 description 3
- 238000006243 chemical reaction Methods 0.000 description 2
- 230000007257 malfunction Effects 0.000 description 2
- 238000012356 Product development Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000002159 abnormal effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000006978 adaptation Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000009286 beneficial effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000010586 diagram Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000004064 dysfunction Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000000694 effects Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000003993 interaction Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000012986 modification Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000004048 modification Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000004044 response Effects 0.000 description 1
Images
Abstract
The invention discloses a confidence evaluation method and an evaluation device of a functional safety parameter calibration tool, wherein the method comprises the following steps: acquiring an original Hex file, wherein the original Hex file is a Hex file without function safety calibration; updating a parameter calibration value related to functional safety; the functional safety parameter calibration tool carries out functional safety calibration on the original Hex file according to the updated parameter calibration value to obtain a calibrated Hex file; reading an original Hex file and a calibrated Hex file, and judging whether the Hex file calibrated by the functional safety parameter calibration tool is unexpectedly changed compared with the original Hex file or not; and generating a report for evaluating the confidence of the functional safety parameter calibration tool according to the comparison result of the two Hex files. The method meets the requirement of evaluating the confidence coefficient of the functional safety parameter calibration tool, and can enable the level of the confidence coefficient of the calibration tool to reach the TD1 level of the error detection level of the tool.
Description
Technical Field
The invention relates to the field of calibration in a safety development process, in particular to a confidence evaluation method and an evaluation device for a functional safety parameter calibration tool.
Background
An ECU (Electronic Control Unit) is an Electronic Control system integrated with high complexity software, and during the development of a product, the same product may be suitable for different scenes and vehicle types, or be matched with different sensors, actuators, and the like, which causes the parameters of the software to be different, such as the signal conversion relationship of a current sensor, the fault response time of an overcurrent error, and the like. The process of determining these software parameters is called calibration in the development process of automotive electronics.
The functional safety means that the electronic and electric products are developed according to a certain standard so as to prevent the electronic and electric system from causing harm to people. In the automotive electronics industry, this standard is ISO26262, which defines functional safety as: "avoid unreasonable risks due to electrical/electronic system failures".
In the product development process, a plurality of software tools are needed, and if the key software tools are abnormal in use, the realization of the functional safety target can be influenced. Thus, chapter 11 of ISO 26262-part8 is specifically defined for the functional safety of software tools.
At present, the mainstream calibration tools in China, such as tools of ToSUN, bright scene and the like, can meet the basic calibration function, but the traditional general calibration software tool has the following problems: functional safety is not considered, a specific safety mechanism is not provided, and whether the Hex file generated by the Hex file is generated according to expectation or not and whether unexpected change occurs in the generation process or not can not be verified; therefore, according to the ISO26262 requirement, only the tool fault detection TD3 grade can be evaluated, and the requirement of functional safety for the tool fault detection grade (TD 1 grade) of the software tool cannot be met.
The above background disclosure is only for the purpose of assisting understanding of the inventive concept and technical solutions of the present invention, and does not necessarily belong to the prior art of the present patent application nor give technical teaching; the above background should not be used to assess the novelty or inventiveness of the present application in the event that there is no clear evidence that the above disclosure has been made prior to the filing date of the present patent application.
Disclosure of Invention
The invention aims to provide a tool error detection level (TD 1) which emphasizes on meeting the requirement of the confidence coefficient of a calibration tool for functional safety and adds a safety mechanism to a traditional software calibration tool so as to ensure that generated calibration and codes meet the functional safety requirement.
In order to achieve the purpose, the technical scheme adopted by the invention is as follows:
a confidence evaluation method of a functional safety parameter calibration tool comprises the following steps:
acquiring an original Hex file, wherein the original Hex file is a Hex file without function safety calibration;
updating a parameter calibration value related to the functional safety;
the functional safety parameter calibration tool carries out functional safety calibration on the original Hex file according to the updated parameter calibration value to obtain a calibrated Hex file;
reading the original Hex file and the calibrated Hex file, and judging whether the Hex file calibrated by the functional safety parameter calibration tool is unexpectedly changed compared with the original Hex file or not;
and generating a report for evaluating the confidence of the functional safety parameter calibration tool according to the comparison result of the two Hex files.
Further, in accordance with any one or combination of the preceding claims, if one of the following conditions exists, determining that the calibrated Hex file has an unexpected change from the original Hex file:
the calibrated Hex file is not calibrated according to the updated parameter calibration value;
alternatively, changes may be made at other codes than parameter scaling.
Further, based on any one or a combination of the above technical solutions, the calibrated Hex file is read in the following manner: reading back the calibrated Hex file according to the Hex file standard to generate a calibrated value;
and if the generated calibration value is inconsistent with the updated parameter calibration value, determining that the calibrated Hex file is not calibrated according to the updated parameter calibration value.
Further, in accordance with any one or a combination of the foregoing technical solutions, if there is no unexpected change in the calibrated Hex file compared to the original Hex file, the confidence level of the functional safety parameter calibration tool obtained by the report evaluation is high.
Further, based on any one or a combination of the foregoing technical solutions, if the number of unexpected changes of the calibrated Hex file compared to the original Hex file is greater than 0 and less than a preset number threshold, the report evaluates that the confidence of the functional safety parameter calibration tool is medium;
if the number of unexpected changes of the calibrated Hex file compared with the original Hex file reaches a preset number threshold, the report evaluates that the confidence of the functional safety parameter calibration tool is low.
Further, in view of any one or a combination of multiple technical solutions, if the confidence level of the functional safety parameter calibration tool obtained by the report evaluation is high, the tool error detection level is selected to be TD1; if the confidence coefficient of the functional safety parameter calibration tool obtained by the report evaluation is a middle level, selecting a tool error detection level as TD2; and if the confidence coefficient of the functional safety parameter calibration tool obtained by the report evaluation is low, selecting the tool error detection level as TD3.
Further, in view of any one or a combination of the foregoing technical solutions, if it is evaluated that the confidence of the functional safety parameter calibration tool is high, the calibrated Hex file is flashed into the ECU by using a flash device.
Further, in accordance with any one or a combination of the foregoing technical solutions, the flash device and the ECU communicate with each other through an XCP protocol.
According to another aspect of the present invention, the present invention provides a confidence evaluation device for a functional safety parameter calibration tool, including the following modules:
an original Hex file obtaining module configured to obtain an original Hex file, the original Hex file being a Hex file without a functional safety calibration;
a calibration value obtaining module configured to obtain an updated parameter calibration value related to the functional safety;
a Hex calibration file obtaining module configured to obtain a Hex calibration file obtained by performing functional safety calibration on the original Hex file by a functional safety parameter calibration tool according to the updated parameter calibration value;
a comparison module configured to determine whether there is an unexpected change in the Hex calibration file as compared to the original Hex file;
a reporting module configured to generate a report for evaluating the confidence of the functional safety parameter calibration tool according to the comparison result of the two Hex files.
Further, in accordance with any one or a combination of the preceding claims, the comparing module comprises a first comparing submodule and a second comparing submodule, wherein,
the first comparison sub-module is configured to compare code portions needing to be changed in functional safety calibration so as to judge whether the Hex calibration file is calibrated according to the updated parameter calibration value;
the second comparison sub-module is configured to compare code portions that need to be changed for non-functional security calibration to determine whether the Hex calibration file has been changed at other codes than for parameter calibration.
The technical scheme provided by the invention has the following beneficial effects:
a. a safety mechanism for detecting whether the functional safety calibration is updated as expected or not and a safety mechanism for detecting whether the Hex content is unexpectedly changed or not by the calibration tool are added, so that the confidence level of the calibration tool is improved (the TD1 level can be reached);
b. the requirement of functional safety (ISO 26262) on the evaluation of a calibration tool can be met;
c. effectively reducing the development cost of the product.
Drawings
In order to more clearly illustrate the embodiments of the present application or the technical solutions in the prior art, the drawings needed to be used in the description of the embodiments or the prior art will be briefly described below, it is obvious that the drawings in the following description are only some embodiments described in the present application, and other drawings can be obtained by those skilled in the art without creative efforts.
Fig. 1 is a schematic flowchart of a confidence evaluation method of a functional safety parameter calibration tool according to an exemplary embodiment of the present invention;
fig. 2 is a schematic diagram of interaction between a functional module and a confidence evaluation device according to an exemplary embodiment of the present invention.
Detailed Description
In order to make the technical solutions of the present invention better understood, the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the drawings in the embodiments of the present invention, and it is obvious that the described embodiments are only a part of the embodiments of the present invention, and not all of the embodiments. All other embodiments, which can be derived by a person skilled in the art from the embodiments given herein without making any creative effort, shall fall within the protection scope of the present invention.
It should be noted that the terms "first," "second," and the like in the description and claims of the present invention and in the drawings described above are used for distinguishing between similar elements and not necessarily for describing a particular sequential or chronological order. It is to be understood that the data so used is interchangeable under appropriate circumstances such that the embodiments of the invention described herein are capable of operation in sequences other than those illustrated or described herein. Furthermore, the terms "comprises," "comprising," and "having," and any variations thereof, are intended to cover a non-exclusive inclusion, such that a process, method, apparatus, article, or device that comprises a list of steps or elements is not necessarily limited to those steps or elements expressly listed, but may include other steps or elements not expressly listed or inherent to such process, method, article, or device.
In the functional safety standard, the functional safety requirement for a Tool is a Tool Confidence Level (TCL). Software tools used for developing software and hardware need to be proven and can support and meet the development activities with different functional safety level requirements. The confidence level of the evaluation software tool is actually aimed at the following two items:
1) The possibility that a software tool dysfunction and its corresponding erroneous output may cause or fail to detect an error in the safety-related item or element being developed;
2) The confidence of these errors in the corresponding output of the software tool is prevented or detected.
Assessing the confidence level of a software tool is a measure for preventing the software tool from malfunctioning and producing a corresponding erroneous output, or a measure for detecting that the software tool is malfunctioning and has produced a corresponding erroneous output.
Confidence is expressed by the tool error detection (TD) level:
when there is a high confidence in preventing or detecting a malfunction and its corresponding erroneous output, TD1 should be selected;
when there is a moderate confidence in preventing or detecting a malfunction and its corresponding erroneous output, TD2 should be selected;
-in other cases TD3 should be selected.
In an embodiment of the present invention, a method for evaluating the confidence of a functional safety parameter calibration tool is provided, and referring to fig. 1, the method for evaluating the confidence of the functional safety parameter calibration tool includes the following steps:
acquiring an original Hex file, wherein the original Hex file is a Hex file without function safety calibration;
updating a parameter calibration value related to the functional safety;
the functional safety parameter calibration tool carries out functional safety calibration on the original Hex file according to the updated parameter calibration value to obtain a calibrated Hex file;
reading the original Hex file and the calibrated Hex file, and judging whether the Hex file calibrated by the functional safety parameter calibration tool is unexpectedly changed compared with the original Hex file or not;
and generating a report for evaluating the confidence of the functional safety parameter calibration tool according to the comparison result of the two Hex files.
As shown in fig. 2, the calibrated Hex file is determined to have an unexpected change from the original Hex file if one of the following conditions exists:
the calibrated Hex file is not calibrated according to the updated parameter calibration value; specifically, the calibrated Hex file is read back according to the Hex file standard to generate a calibrated value; and if the generated calibration value is inconsistent with the updated parameter calibration value, determining that the calibrated Hex file is not calibrated according to the updated parameter calibration value.
Or, a change occurs at a code other than parameter calibration, specifically, by comparing a part of the original Hex content, which is not the Hex content requiring a change in functional safety calibration, with the generated Hex content, it is determined whether the calibration tool unexpectedly changes the Hex that does not require a change.
And judging according to the above rules, if the calibrated Hex file has no unexpected change compared with the original Hex file, the report evaluates that the confidence of the functional safety parameter calibration tool is high, and then selecting a tool error detection level as TD1.
If the number of unexpected changes of the calibrated Hex file compared with the original Hex file is more than 0 and less than 3, the confidence of the functional safety parameter calibration tool obtained by the report evaluation is a middle level, and a tool error detection level is selected as TD2;
and if the number of unexpected changes of the calibrated Hex file compared with the original Hex file is greater than or equal to 3, the report evaluates that the confidence of the functional safety parameter calibration tool is low, and then a tool error detection level is selected as TD3.
And if the confidence coefficient of the functional safety parameter calibration tool is evaluated to be high (the tool error detection level is TD 1), the calibrated Hex file is flashed to the ECU by using the flashing device, and the flashing device and the ECU are communicated through an XCP protocol.
The principle of functional safety calibration detection is as follows:
(1) updating the functional safety related calibration to Hex of the corresponding VCU through a calibration tool;
(2) reading back the Hex through the safety mechanism, and reversely deducing a standard quantity value (such as a limit value of torque monitoring) in the Hex according to the conversion relation of the Hex;
(3) judging whether the calibration value needing to be updated is updated as expected or not by comparing the set torque monitoring limit value with the torque monitoring limit value in the actually generated Hex;
(4) judging whether the calibration tool unexpectedly changes the Hex which does not need to be changed by comparing the part which is not needed to be changed in the function safety calibration in the original Hex content with the generated Hex content;
(5) and judging whether the generated calibration tool is executed according to the expected function or not by checking the generated report, and whether the requirement of function safety is met or not.
In an embodiment of the present invention, a confidence evaluation apparatus of a functional safety parameter calibration tool is provided, which includes the following modules:
an original Hex file acquisition module configured to acquire an original Hex file, which is a Hex file without a functional safety calibration;
a calibration value obtaining module configured to obtain an updated parameter calibration value related to the functional safety;
a Hex calibration file obtaining module configured to obtain a Hex calibration file obtained by a functional safety parameter calibration tool performing functional safety calibration on the original Hex file according to the updated parameter calibration value;
a comparison module configured to determine whether there is an unexpected change in the Hex calibration file as compared to the original Hex file; specifically, the comparison module includes a first comparison sub-module and a second comparison sub-module, where the first comparison sub-module is configured to compare code portions whose functional security calibration needs to be changed, so as to determine whether the Hex calibration file is calibrated according to the updated parameter calibration value; the second comparison sub-module is configured to compare code portions that need to be changed for non-functional security calibration to determine whether the Hex calibration file has been changed at other codes than for parameter calibration.
A reporting module configured to generate a report for evaluating the confidence of the functional safety parameter calibration tool according to the comparison result of the two Hex files.
The embodiment of the evaluation apparatus provided in this embodiment and the embodiment of the evaluation method provided in the above embodiment belong to the same concept, and the specific implementation process thereof is detailed in the embodiment of the method, that is, all the features in the embodiment of the confidence evaluation method for a functional safety parameter calibration tool described above can be introduced into the embodiment of the confidence evaluation apparatus for a functional safety parameter calibration tool in a manner of reference.
It should be noted that, in this document, relational terms such as first and second, and the like are used solely to distinguish one entity or action from another entity or action without necessarily requiring or implying any actual such relationship or order between such entities or actions. Also, the terms "comprises," "comprising," or any other variation thereof, are intended to cover a non-exclusive inclusion, such that a process, method, article, or apparatus that comprises a list of elements does not include only those elements but may include other elements not expressly listed or inherent to such process, method, article, or apparatus. Without further limitation, an element defined by the phrase "comprising a … …" does not exclude the presence of another identical element in a process, method, article, or apparatus that comprises the element.
The foregoing is directed to embodiments of the present application and it is noted that numerous modifications and adaptations may be made by those skilled in the art without departing from the principles of the present application and are intended to be within the scope of the present application.
Claims (10)
1. A confidence evaluation method of a functional safety parameter calibration tool is characterized by comprising the following steps:
acquiring an original Hex file, wherein the original Hex file is a Hex file without function safety calibration;
updating a parameter calibration value related to the functional safety;
the functional safety parameter calibration tool carries out functional safety calibration on the original Hex file according to the updated parameter calibration value to obtain a calibrated Hex file;
reading the original Hex file and the calibrated Hex file, and judging whether the Hex file calibrated by the functional safety parameter calibration tool is unexpectedly changed compared with the original Hex file or not;
and generating a report for evaluating the confidence of the functional safety parameter calibration tool according to the comparison result of the two Hex files.
2. The confidence evaluation method of a functional safety parameter calibration tool according to claim 1, wherein it is determined that there is an unexpected change in the calibrated Hex file compared to the original Hex file if one of the following conditions exists:
the calibrated Hex file is not calibrated according to the updated parameter calibration value;
alternatively, changes have occurred at other codes than parameter calibration.
3. The confidence evaluation method of a functional safety parameter calibration tool according to claim 2, characterized in that the calibrated Hex file is read by: reading back the calibrated Hex file according to the Hex file standard to generate a calibrated value;
and if the generated calibration value is inconsistent with the updated parameter calibration value, judging that the calibrated Hex file is not calibrated according to the updated parameter calibration value.
4. The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the confidence level of the functional safety parameter calibration tool obtained by the report evaluation is high if there is no unexpected change in the calibrated Hex file compared to the original Hex file.
5. The method for evaluating the confidence of a functional safety parameter calibration tool according to claim 4, wherein if the number of unexpected changes of the calibrated Hex file compared to the original Hex file is greater than 0 and less than a preset number threshold, the confidence of the functional safety parameter calibration tool obtained by the report evaluation is of a medium level;
if the number of unexpected changes of the calibrated Hex file compared with the original Hex file reaches a preset number threshold, the report evaluates that the confidence of the functional safety parameter calibration tool is low.
6. The method for evaluating the confidence level of a functional safety parameter calibration tool according to claim 4, wherein if the confidence level of the functional safety parameter calibration tool obtained by the report evaluation is high, a tool error detection level is selected as TD1; if the confidence coefficient of the functional safety parameter calibration tool obtained by the report evaluation is a middle level, selecting a tool error detection level as TD2; and if the confidence coefficient of the functional safety parameter calibration tool obtained by the report evaluation is low, selecting the tool error detection level as TD3.
7. The method for evaluating the confidence level of a functional safety parameter calibration tool according to claim 1, wherein if the confidence level of the functional safety parameter calibration tool is evaluated to be high, the calibrated Hex file is flashed into the ECU by using a flash device.
8. The confidence evaluation method of the functional safety parameter calibration tool according to claim 7, wherein the communication between the writing device and the ECU is via XCP protocol.
9. A confidence evaluation device of a functional safety parameter calibration tool is characterized by comprising the following modules:
an original Hex file obtaining module configured to obtain an original Hex file, the original Hex file being a Hex file without a functional safety calibration;
a calibration value obtaining module configured to obtain an updated parameter calibration value related to the functional safety;
a Hex calibration file obtaining module configured to obtain a Hex calibration file obtained by performing functional safety calibration on the original Hex file by a functional safety parameter calibration tool according to the updated parameter calibration value;
a comparison module configured to determine whether there is an unexpected change in the Hex calibration file as compared to the original Hex file;
a reporting module configured to generate a report for evaluating a confidence of the functional safety parameter calibration tool according to a comparison result of the two Hex files.
10. The functional safety parameter calibration tool confidence assessment device according to claim 9, wherein the comparison module comprises a first comparison sub-module and a second comparison sub-module, wherein,
the first comparison sub-module is configured to compare code portions needing to be changed in functional safety calibration so as to judge whether the Hex calibration file is calibrated according to the updated parameter calibration value;
the second comparison sub-module is configured to compare code portions that need to be changed for non-functional security calibration to determine whether the Hex calibration file has been changed at other codes than for parameter calibration.
Priority Applications (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202211723283.3A CN115878224A (en) | 2022-12-30 | 2022-12-30 | Confidence evaluation method and evaluation device for functional safety parameter calibration tool |
Applications Claiming Priority (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202211723283.3A CN115878224A (en) | 2022-12-30 | 2022-12-30 | Confidence evaluation method and evaluation device for functional safety parameter calibration tool |
Publications (1)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CN115878224A true CN115878224A (en) | 2023-03-31 |
Family
ID=85757537
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202211723283.3A Withdrawn CN115878224A (en) | 2022-12-30 | 2022-12-30 | Confidence evaluation method and evaluation device for functional safety parameter calibration tool |
Country Status (1)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| CN (1) | CN115878224A (en) |
-
2022
- 2022-12-30 CN CN202211723283.3A patent/CN115878224A/en not_active Withdrawn
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| Lefebvre et al. | Diagnosis of DES with Petri net models | |
| Cocquempot et al. | Fault detection and isolation for hybrid systems using structured parity residuals | |
| EP2803048B1 (en) | System and method for providing diagnostic fault information | |
| US20080154544A1 (en) | Monitoring and fault detection in dynamic systems | |
| EP1390822A1 (en) | Diagnostics for industrial process control and measurement systems | |
| US7539903B2 (en) | Method for monitoring the execution of a program by comparing a request with a response and introducing a falsification in a response | |
| CN109145256A (en) | Nonlinear dynamic process monitoring method based on canonical variable Nonlinear Principal Component Analysis | |
| US20220156586A1 (en) | System for monitoring a circuit breaker | |
| US8285514B2 (en) | Sensor fault detection systems and methods thereof | |
| CN111208802A (en) | Intelligent diagnosis method and system for front-end redundancy of control system, memory and controller | |
| CN115878224A (en) | Confidence evaluation method and evaluation device for functional safety parameter calibration tool | |
| KR101834247B1 (en) | Method and apparatus for analyzing safety of automotive software | |
| US10649835B2 (en) | Method for determining information on an integrity of signal processing components within a signal path, signal processing circuit and electric control unit | |
| US7191096B1 (en) | Multi-dimensional sequential probability ratio test for detecting failure conditions in computer systems | |
| CN101738237A (en) | Transfer of a component with effect on the safety function from the safety-relevant area | |
| CN116127270A (en) | Abnormality detection method, abnormality detection device, abnormality detection apparatus, abnormality detection medium, and abnormality detection product | |
| US20110302989A1 (en) | Method for safe performance of a calibration and/or an adjusting of a measured variable of a measuring device in automation technology, especially in process analysis technology | |
| CN111127855A (en) | Environmental event monitoring method and system of environmental Internet of things | |
| CN112462230A (en) | Fault detection method, device and equipment for signal channel | |
| Pipe et al. | An automated data-driven toolset for predictive analytics | |
| US20230080078A1 (en) | Method of detecting normality of pwm signal of airbag controller | |
| Bock et al. | Analytical test effort estimation for multisensor driver assistance systems | |
| CN115267614B (en) | Detection method and system for intelligent transformer | |
| Grebe et al. | Fmeda–accurate product failure metrics | |
| CN115097248A (en) | Electric oil pump fault detection method and device for new energy automobile |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination | ||
| WW01 | Invention patent application withdrawn after publication |
Application publication date: 20230331 |
|
| WW01 | Invention patent application withdrawn after publication |