Field data on the candidate's operation (service period, observation rate, incident and failure reports) are analysed to show that the observed rate of safety-related incidents is below the target for the ASIL over a sufficient period of use, with the data collection and the statistical method justified (part 10 clause 10 gives an example). This sits in clause 14, whose stated aim is to guide the argument that an existing item or element has proved itself in use, an alternative route to compliance when field data exist. Requirement text not held.
This control maps to 2 controls across 2 other frameworks. If you already hold one of them, the evidence you collected for it is the starting point here rather than new work.
Every mapping shown was judged rather than inferred from wording similarity, and the ones that failed review are published too. See the coverage reports and what was rejected.
The graph holds this control, the 2 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.