近日，续创信息技术咨询（成都）有限公司自主研发的 CINO AsPiCe 开发系统与北京东土科技股份有限公司完成签约。系统将用于东土科技的研发流程标准化、项目精细化管控与安全合规体系升级。
▌ 一次不轻松的选型
工业软件企业挑工具，比一般企业苛刻——坐在评审席上的人自己就写代码、管架构、发版本。
据项目组介绍，东土科技在选型阶段对系统做了多轮技术评审，重点看三件事：标准条款是否真的落到流程里、追溯是不是自动生成、AI 是否嵌进开发动作而不是外挂在旁边写文档。
这个顺序值得说。多数工具演示时讲的是“能生成什么文档”，而做研发的人关心的是另一类问题：需求改了，下游的设计、代码、测试用例会不会自动标记待更新；审核员随手抽一条需求，能不能在三分钟内走完到测试用例的完整链路。
▌ 三套标准，三套文档，三条追溯链
车载与工业软件的合规，长期是“标准各自为政”的局面：ASPICE 管软件过程、ISO 26262 管功能安全、ISO/SAE 21434 管网络安全，条款彼此交叉，文档却各写一套。企业常见的做法是为每套标准建一套模板、养一条追溯链，同一个项目在三个体系里各跑一遍。
代价是显性的：文档重复编制、评审反复对齐、追溯靠人工拼接，项目一多就失控。
▌ 系统做了什么
CINO AsPiCe 的思路是把三套标准收敛到一条 V 模型主线上：
- 一条主线：需求、设计、编码、测试在同一项目空间展开，标准条款随阶段挂载，不再按标准分头立项；
- 全链路追溯：需求—设计—代码—测试自动关联，变更向下游自动标记，审核时按条目导出证据链；
- AI 嵌入动作：需求分析、文档撰写、测试用例编写由 AI 辅助完成，人在关键节点判断；
- 一键导出：项目文档与合规报告按标准格式批量生成；
- 分级管控：开发库、受控库、基线库、产品库分层管理，研发资料全程可追溯；
- 内置模板：ASPICE、ISO 26262、ISO/SAE 21434 等合规模板一键导入，省去从零搭框架。
▌ 落地之后看什么
采购只是起点。系统上线后，双方把验收口径落在三件事上：单个项目的文档编制工时下降多少、审核准备周期缩短多少、追溯链能否直接支撑外部评估。
三项指向同一个判断——合规投入能不能从“堆人堆文档”变成“流程自己跑”。
▌ 关于东土科技
北京东土科技股份有限公司长期深耕工业互联网、工业控制、工业网络芯片、工业操作系统与工业通信总线等关键领域，其鸿道 Intewell 工业操作系统被列为国家级重点产品，MaVIEW 软件定义控制工具软件曾获中国工业互联网大赛最高奖项。在工业软件自主可控这条路上，东土科技是具有代表性的企业之一。
▌ 关于续创
续创信息技术咨询（成都）有限公司专注高端制造数字化咨询、AI 智能培训与自研标准化软件平台，自研 CINO AsPiCe 开发系统、CINO FMEA 失效分析平台、CINO APQP 管理系统三大平台，服务网络覆盖成都、重庆、北京、上海、广州、深圳、武汉七城。
记住一句：合规的成本，不在标准本身，而在同一件事被做了三遍。
想看看三套标准怎么在一条主线上跑完？可预约 CINO AsPiCe 在线演示。
Recently, CINO Information Technology Consulting (Chengdu) Co., Ltd. signed an agreement with Kyland Technology Co., Ltd. (Beijing) for CINO AsPiCe, CINO's self-developed development management system. The system will be used to standardise Kyland's R&D process, tighten project-level control and upgrade its safety and compliance system.
▌ A demanding selection process
Industrial software companies pick tools more critically than most — the people on the review panel write code, own architecture and ship releases themselves.
According to the project team, Kyland put the system through several rounds of technical review, focusing on three questions: do the standard clauses actually land in the workflow, is traceability generated automatically, and is AI embedded in development actions rather than bolted on to write documents on the side.
The order matters. Most tool demos talk about what documents can be generated; the people doing the work ask a different set of questions. When a requirement changes, are the downstream design, code and test cases flagged automatically? Can an auditor pick a requirement at random and walk the full chain to its test cases in three minutes?
▌ Three standards, three document sets, three traceability chains
Compliance for automotive and industrial software has long been a case of standards pulling in different directions: ASPICE governs the software process, ISO 26262 governs functional safety, ISO/SAE 21434 governs cybersecurity. The clauses overlap; the documents do not. The usual approach is to build a template set and a traceability chain for each standard, and run the same project three times across three systems.
The cost is visible: duplicated documentation, repeated alignment in reviews, traceability stitched together by hand — and once projects multiply, control is lost.
▌ What the system does
CINO AsPiCe converges the three standards onto a single V-model mainline:
- One mainline: requirements, design, coding and testing unfold in the same project space; standard clauses attach to each phase instead of being run as separate projects.
- End-to-end traceability: requirement, design, code and test are linked automatically; changes are flagged downstream; evidence chains are exported by item for audits.
- AI inside the work: requirement analysis, documentation and test-case writing are AI-assisted, with people making the judgement calls at key points.
- One-click export: project documents and compliance reports are generated in bulk in the required formats.
- Tiered control: development, controlled, baseline and product libraries are managed in layers, with every artefact traceable.
- Built-in templates: ASPICE, ISO 26262 and ISO/SAE 21434 templates import in one click, so teams do not start from a blank framework.
▌ What gets measured after rollout
Purchase is the starting point. Once the system is live, both sides agreed to measure three things: how much documentation effort drops per project, how much shorter audit preparation becomes, and whether the traceability chain can stand up to an external assessment.
All three point to the same question — whether compliance spend can move from piling on people and documents to the process running itself.
▌ About Kyland Technology
Kyland Technology Co., Ltd. has worked for years across industrial internet, industrial control, industrial network chips, industrial operating systems and industrial communication buses. Its Intewell industrial operating system is listed as a national key product, and its MaVIEW software-defined control tool won the top prize at China's first Industrial Internet competition. On the path to self-reliant industrial software, Kyland is one of the representative companies.
▌ About CINO
CINO Information Technology Consulting (Chengdu) Co., Ltd. focuses on digital consulting for advanced manufacturing, AI-enabled training and self-developed standardised software platforms. Its three platforms are CINO AsPiCe, the CINO FMEA failure analysis platform and CINO APQP. Its service network covers Chengdu, Chongqing, Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, Shenzhen and Wuhan.
One line to remember: the cost of compliance is not in the standards, but in doing the same thing three times.
Want to see how three standards run on one mainline? Book a CINO AsPiCe demo.