Skip to content
Evidence before scaling

Validation that turns tests into reliable decisions

A proposed method to verify safety, technical performance, agronomic usefulness, and data integrity of the Caatinga Rover before any commercial offer.

Prototype TRL 5Audit-enabled processInstitutional entities in articulation
Know the methodPropose technical cooperation
Process commitments

Validation is more than testing

Each conclusion must be linkable to a requirement, a protocol, a prototype version, and preserved evidence.

01

Safety by design

Identify hazards early, reduce risks at the source, and verify measures taken.

02

Traceability

Relate requirements, versions, tests, occurrences, corrections, and results.

03

Separation of roles

Who develops provides evidence; the technical review questions method and interpretation.

04

Reproducibility

Record conditions and method so the trial can be repeated and compared.

05

Privacy and security

Collect only necessary data, control access, and set retention and disposal.

06

Stage transparency

Distinguish observation, preliminary result, validated result, and future goal.

Decision gates

A validation cycle with progress contingent on evidence

One stage is not approved just because the test was executed. Criteria, deviations, and residual risks need to be documented.

  1. G0
    Set

    Usage, requirements and risks

    Task, environment, users, foreseeable misuse, indicators, and acceptance criteria.

  2. G1
    Verify

    Bench and subsystems

    Controls, power, stop, sensors, software, implements, and simulated faults.

  3. G2
    Demonstrate

    Controlled field

    Supervised operation, closed protocol, and recording of occurrences in a relevant environment.

  4. G3
    Validate

    Multi-site and multi-pest

    Repetition under different conditions, agronomic comparison, and independent review.

  5. G4
    Qualify

    Pre-series and compliance

    Technical dossier, applicable tests, instructions, residual risks, and conformity assessment.

Possible outputs at each gateApproved for next stageApproved with restrictionsRepeat after correctionInterrupt and redesign
Proposed governance

Clear assignments prevent the project from validating itself

Institucional roles below are a proposed work plan and depend on formalized agreements, teams, and scopes.

Responsible for development

Caatinga Robotics

  • Define requirements and maintain the risk matrix
  • Develop hardware, software and implements
  • Performs tests and preserves raw data
  • Records failures, fixes and versions
  • Prepare the technical dossier
Proposed articulation

Embrapa

  • Support the design of agronomic protocols
  • Define indicators, sampling and comparators
  • Review agronomic classification and interpretation
  • Contribute to auditable technical language
Proposed articulation

IFCE Fortaleza and IFCE Tauá

  • Support robotics, energy and instrumentation
  • Review reproducibility and measurement method
  • Contribute to control tests and telemetry
  • Support technical training linked to trials
Proposed articulation

Ematerce, cooperatives and producers

  • Prioritize problems and use scenarios
  • Support testing areas and operational context
  • Evaluate usability, maintenance and perceived risks
  • Record feedback without substituting a technical test
Master validation plan

Six domains that must converge

01

Machine safety

Mechanical, electrical, thermal hazards, stability, protections, stopping, and maintenance.

Expected evidenceRisk analysis, hazard list, stop tests, and record corrective actions.
02

Navigation and control

Manual control, recorded route, remote intervention, and future autonomous functions.

Expected evidenceRoute deviation, signal loss, latency, accuracy, geofence, and safe state.
03

Energy and durability

Battery, photovoltaic support, connections, temperature, autonomy, and environment.

Expected evidenceCycling, consumption, electrical protection, dust, humidity, vibration, and inspection.
04

Implements

Risks and quality specifics of mowing, spraying, and each new module.

Expected evidencePerformance, coupling, projections, drift, leaks, vibration, and wear.
05

Agronomic validation

Task quality and effect on the crop, without inferring result from appearance.

Expected evidenceProtocol, sampling, control group, replication, and technical analysis
06

Data and traceability

Images, telemetry, events, software versions, and decisions

Expected evidenceOrigin, integrity, access, retention, anonymization, and reproducible reporting.
From field to report

Continuous flow with integrity and revision

  1. 01

    Plan

    Protocol, variables, consents, and version under test

  2. 02

    Collect

    Images, telemetry, events, context and observations.

  3. 03

    Preserve

    Identifier, timestamp, integrity, access, and controlled copy

  4. 04

    Classify

    Technical labels, discrepancy review, and change trail

  5. 05

    Analyze

    Indicators defined before the result and explicit limitations

  6. 06

    Report

    Method, sample, result, deviations, version, and responsible persons

Use of AI

Models do not validate themselves. Training sets, labels, versions, metrics, false positives, false negatives, and human review must remain documented.

Compliance plan

References to map from the project

Applicability and current edition must be confirmed by a qualified professional and competent bodies for each configuration and use.

NR-12 e Anexo XISecurity in the life cycle of agricultural machines and implementsISO 12100:2010Hazard identification, risk assessment and reduction in the projectSérie ISO 18497:2024Reference for the safety of highly automated agricultural machines.Série ISO 25119Parts of control systems related to safetyLGPD — Lei 13.709/2018Purpose, necessity, safety, and rights in personal data processing.

Referencing a standard does not imply compliance. The Caatinga Rover remains under technical and regulatory validation.

Accountability

What a validation report should show

  • Identification of prototype, software and implement
  • Goal, hypothesis, and criteria defined before the test
  • Location, conditions, operators, sample and comparators
  • Complete results, including failures and inconclusive data
  • Protocol deviations, limitations, and conflicts of interest
  • Corrective actions, residual risks and gate decision
Collaborative and formal validation

Your institution or field area can contribute a stage of the method.

Propose a protocol, technical review, laboratory, test area, or institutional cooperation.

Propose cooperation