pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.16319 · v1 · submitted 2026-02-24 · 💻 cs.SE · cs.ET

Software-Defined Vehicle Ecosystems in Transformation -- A Systematic Literature Review

Heidi Hietala , Nirnaya Tripathi , Prabhash Rathnayake , Yueqiang Xu , Tero P\"aiv\"arinta , Ella Peltonen This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 20:03 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.SE cs.ET
keywords software-defined vehiclessystematic literature reviewecosystem collaborationautomotive industrystakeholder groupschallenges and opportunitiesgovernance
0
0 comments X

The pith

SDV ecosystems form through six levels of collaboration among twelve stakeholder groups under five authority dimensions.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This review examines the automotive shift from hardware-centric to software-defined vehicles, where software drives functionality and value. It establishes that these ecosystems operate via six levels of collaboration involving twelve stakeholder groups, shaped by five dimensions of authority. The synthesis catalogs twenty-two challenges spanning software development, organization, industry, market, and regulatory areas, plus seventeen opportunities in software, organizational, market, and public value domains. A reader would care because firm-centric development models fall short for the rising software complexity, making ecosystem structures essential to understand. The work repositions software-defined vehicles as multi-level socio-technical systems rather than purely technical products.

Core claim

The study identifies six levels of collaboration involving twelve stakeholder groups shaping SDV ecosystem transformation. These collaborations are influenced by five dimensions of authority. SDV ecosystems face six core software development challenges alongside six organisational, six industry and market, and four regulatory, legal, and ethical challenges. The literature also highlights five key software development opportunities complemented by six organisational, four industry and market, and two public value and ethical opportunities. We reposition SDVs as multi-level socio-technical ecosystems where software functions as the core structuring principle but does not alone determine ecosyt

What carries the argument

The multi-level SDV ecosystem model that integrates stakeholders, collaborative structures, and governance across six levels.

Load-bearing premise

The body of literature reviewed is sufficiently complete, unbiased, and representative to support the specific counts of six collaboration levels, twelve stakeholder groups, and the listed challenges and opportunities without significant categorization bias.

What would settle it

A new systematic review or industry survey that identifies a substantially different number of collaboration levels or major stakeholder groups outside the twelve would challenge the specific structure.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.16319 by Ella Peltonen, Heidi Hietala, Nirnaya Tripathi, Prabhash Rathnayake, Tero P\"aiv\"arinta, Yueqiang Xu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Overview of a software-defined vehicle and its ecosystem [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Example of a generic SDV architecture [49, 31]. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Research Process and SLR Protocol [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Bibliometric analysis overview and management journals. As a result, the research re￾mains largely technical, focusing on the standardisation of the SDV architecture, interoperability, and cybersecu￾rity, while leaving ecosystem governance, particularly in terms of collaboration around software, business models, and regional variation, to receive less attention. European perspectives, including those from … view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: SDV Ecosystem Model to make strategic make–buy–ally decisions in software de￾velopment based on differentiation potential and internal capabilities [30, 24], while requiring investments in soft￾ware talent, cultural change, and ecosystem partnerships to remain competitive in software-defined mobility [30]. Business model realisation in SDV ecosystems increas￾ingly relies on platform-based strategies, phase… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The automotive industry is shifting from hardware-centric development toward software-defined vehicles (SDVs), where software drives functionality, value creation, and competitive differentiation. Growing software complexity renders firm-centric and proprietary software development models insufficient, prompting a shift toward ecosystem collaboration among OEMs, suppliers, and software firms. Yet, how these SDV ecosystems emerge and operate in response to software-driven development remains insufficiently understood. This study enhances our understanding of SDV ecosystems, outlines their collaborative structures, identifies stakeholders, their roles and authority, and highlights associated challenges and opportunities. This study identifies six levels of collaboration involving twelve stakeholder groups shaping SDV ecosystem transformation. These collaborations are influenced by five dimensions of authority. SDV ecosystems face six core software development challenges alongside six organisational, six industry and market, and four regulatory, legal, and ethical challenges. The literature also highlights five key software development opportunities complemented by six organisational, four industry and market, and two public value and ethical opportunities. SDV ecosystem research is primarily technical, concentrating on architectures and standardisation, while lacking studies on governance and collaborative software business models that reflect regional characteristics and power dynamics. We reposition SDVs as multi-level socio-technical ecosystems where software functions as the core structuring principle but does not alone determine ecosystem success. We develop a multi-level SDV ecosystem model, integrating stakeholders, collaborative structures, and governance across ecosystem levels, and outline directions for future research and practice.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. This systematic literature review examines the shift in the automotive industry toward software-defined vehicles (SDVs), where software drives functionality and value. The paper identifies six levels of collaboration involving twelve stakeholder groups, shaped by five dimensions of authority. It enumerates six core software development challenges, six organisational challenges, six industry and market challenges, and four regulatory, legal, and ethical challenges, alongside five software development opportunities, six organisational opportunities, four industry and market opportunities, and two public value and ethical opportunities. The authors synthesize these into a multi-level SDV ecosystem model, note the predominance of technical research, and call for more work on governance and collaborative business models that account for regional and power dynamics.

Significance. If the synthesis holds, the paper provides a structured overview that integrates technical architectures with organisational and regulatory dimensions of SDV ecosystems. This could serve as a reference point for researchers studying ecosystem transformation and for practitioners navigating stakeholder collaborations, while highlighting under-explored areas such as governance mechanisms and regionally sensitive business models.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract and (presumed) Methods section: The manuscript asserts precise enumerations—six collaboration levels, twelve stakeholder groups, five authority dimensions, and the exact tallies of challenges and opportunities—yet provides no details on search protocol, databases, inclusion/exclusion criteria, PRISMA flow, quality assessment, or inter-rater reliability. These counts are load-bearing for the central claim of an interpretive multi-level model; without them, it is impossible to assess whether the categories reflect the literature or author-imposed structure.
  2. [Results/Discussion] Results/Discussion on the multi-level model: The interpretive synthesis into six levels and the repositioning of SDVs as socio-technical ecosystems rests on thematic aggregation across papers, but no evidence is supplied on how coding consistency was maintained or how alternative categorizations were ruled out. This directly affects the model's claimed structure and the gap analysis regarding governance studies.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract and conclusion could more explicitly link the enumerated challenges/opportunities back to specific cited papers to strengthen traceability.
  2. [Discussion] A visual diagram of the proposed multi-level model would improve clarity on how the six levels, twelve stakeholders, and five authority dimensions interrelate.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the referee's comments. We appreciate the detailed feedback on the methodological rigor and the interpretive synthesis in our systematic literature review. Below, we address each major comment point by point, indicating the revisions we will make to the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and (presumed) Methods section: The manuscript asserts precise enumerations—six collaboration levels, twelve stakeholder groups, five authority dimensions, and the exact tallies of challenges and opportunities—yet provides no details on search protocol, databases, inclusion/exclusion criteria, PRISMA flow, quality assessment, or inter-rater reliability. These counts are load-bearing for the central claim of an interpretive multi-level model; without them, it is impossible to assess whether the categories reflect the literature or author-imposed structure.

    Authors: We agree with the referee that greater detail on the systematic review methodology is required to support the precise enumerations presented. The manuscript does include a Methods section, but it lacks the full protocol details mentioned. We will revise the manuscript to include a comprehensive description of the search protocol, databases searched, inclusion/exclusion criteria, PRISMA flow diagram, quality assessment criteria, and inter-rater reliability measures. This will clarify how the categories were derived from the literature. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results/Discussion] Results/Discussion on the multi-level model: The interpretive synthesis into six levels and the repositioning of SDVs as socio-technical ecosystems rests on thematic aggregation across papers, but no evidence is supplied on how coding consistency was maintained or how alternative categorizations were ruled out. This directly affects the model's claimed structure and the gap analysis regarding governance studies.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the current presentation of the multi-level model does not provide sufficient detail on the thematic analysis process. We will revise the Results and Discussion sections to include information on how coding consistency was maintained (e.g., through author discussions and iterative refinement) and how the six-level structure was selected over alternatives, based on the patterns observed in the reviewed papers. This will better support the model's structure and the gap analysis. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: counts and model are interpretive synthesis from external literature

full rationale

The paper is a systematic literature review whose headline enumerations (six collaboration levels, twelve stakeholders, five authority dimensions, and categorized challenges/opportunities) are presented as aggregates drawn from the body of reviewed external papers. No equations, fitted parameters, self-definitional constructs, or load-bearing self-citations appear in the abstract or described structure; the multi-level model is an interpretive synthesis rather than a derivation that reduces to the paper's own inputs by construction. The derivation chain therefore remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claims rest on the representativeness of the reviewed literature and the validity of the authors' interpretive categorization into discrete levels, dimensions, challenges, and opportunities.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The body of literature identified through systematic search is representative of SDV ecosystem research without major regional or publication bias.
    Underpins the specific counts of six levels, twelve stakeholders, and enumerated challenges/opportunities.
invented entities (1)
  • Multi-level SDV ecosystem model no independent evidence
    purpose: Integrates stakeholders, collaborative structures, and governance across ecosystem levels.
    Author-developed synthesis presented as a new framework; no independent empirical validation or external benchmark cited in abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5578 in / 1316 out tokens · 70553 ms · 2026-05-15T20:03:30.605372+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

72 extracted references · 72 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    S. Aust. Vehicle api and service catalog for next gen- eration mobility. In2022 25th International Sympo- sium on Wireless Personal Multimedia Communica- tions (WPMC), pages 418–423. IEEE, 2022

    work page 2022

  2. [2]

    Axelsson, E

    J. Axelsson, E. Papatheocharous, and J. Andersson. Characteristics of software ecosystems for federated embedded systems: A case study.Information and Software Technology, 56(11):1457–1475, 2014

    work page 2014

  3. [3]

    Bandur, G

    V. Bandur, G. Selim, V. Pantelic, and M. Lawford. Making the Case for Centralized Automotive E/E Ar- chitectures.IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Tech- nology, 70(2):1230–1245, 2021

    work page 2021

  4. [4]

    Bazzi, A

    A. Bazzi, A. Shaout, and D. Ma. A Novel Variability- RichSchemeforSoftwareUpdatesofAutomotiveSys- tems.IEEE Access, 12:79530–79548, 2024

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    J. Becker. Operating system for software-defined ve- hicles.ATZelectronics worldwide, 17(5):40–45, 2022

    work page 2022

  6. [6]

    Becker and J

    J. Becker and J. Speed. What if cars could be as easy to program as smartphones are today? InInter- national ATZ Conference, pages 169–180. Springer, 2022

    work page 2022

  7. [7]

    Bhandari, G

    R. Bhandari, G. Gupta, H. V. Sanne, A. P. Perumal, A. Balakrishnan, and S. Gochhait. Software-driven revolution redefining automotive industry. InInter- national Conference on ICT for Sustainable Develop- ment, pages 97–105. Springer, 2024

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Bhange, E

    A. Bhange, E. Börner, M. Jentges, and M. Engelhard. Entwicklungsmethoden für fahrzeugarchitekturen der nächsten generation.ATZextra, 28(1):8–13, 2023

    work page 2023

  9. [9]

    S. G. Bupalam Prasanna, V. Vinod, and A. J. So- man. A System Integrator perspective for navigating the future of mobility through Software Driven Vehi- cles. In2023 IEEE International Transportation Elec- trification Conference (ITEC-India), Infosys Limited,

    work page

  10. [10]

    Cheng, D

    X. Cheng, D. Burkhardt, D. Slama, and I. Gharsal- lah. Anti-Kinetosis: AHybridAnalyticsApproachfor Motion Sickness Detection in Software-Defined Vehi- cles. InAmericas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS 2025), page 6, 8 2025

    work page 2025

  11. [11]

    Coppola and M

    R. Coppola and M. Morisio. Connected car: technolo- gies, issues, future trends.ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 49(3):1–36, 2016

    work page 2016

  12. [12]

    D. S. Cruzes and T. Dyba. Recommended steps for thematic synthesis in software engineering. In2011 international symposium on empirical software en- gineering and measurement, pages 275–284. IEEE, 2011

    work page 2011

  13. [13]

    Dettinger, M

    F. Dettinger, M. Weiß, and M. Weyrich. Future use casesforvehicularcommunicationbasedonconnected functions. In2024 IEEE 100th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC2024-Fall), pages 1–5. IEEE, 2024

    work page 2024

  14. [14]

    A. B. C. Douss, R. Abassi, and D. Sauveron. State- of-the-art survey of in-vehicle protocols and automo- tive ethernet security and vulnerabilities.Mathemat- ical Biosciences and Engineering, 20(9):17057–17095, 2023

    work page 2023

  15. [15]

    European Commission. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Coun- cil, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Industrial Action Plan for the European automotive sector, 2025. 21

    work page 2025

  16. [16]

    Ghimire, E

    S. Ghimire, E. Bardaka, K. Monast, J. Wang, and W. Wright. Policy, management, and operation prac- tices in us microtransit systems.Transport Policy, 145:259–278, 2024

    work page 2024

  17. [17]

    Halder, A

    S. Halder, A. Ghosal, and M. Conti. Secure over-the- air software updates in connected vehicles: A survey. Computer Networks, 178:107343, 2020

    work page 2020

  18. [18]

    Hietala and T

    H. Hietala and T. Päivärinta. Governing collective ambidexterity: Antecedents, mechanisms, and out- comes in digital service ecosystems.Government In- formation Quarterly, 42(1), 2025

    work page 2025

  19. [19]

    Hillier and R

    C. Hillier and R. Ionescu. Driving toward success in software-defined-vehicle development.Microwaves & RF, Jun 23 2025

    work page 2025

  20. [20]

    Hillier and R

    C. Hillier and R. Ionescu. Why the cloud is essential for sdv development.EE Times, Jun 26 2025

    work page 2025

  21. [21]

    T. Iida, M. Matsubara, K. Yoshimura, H. Kojima, and K. Nishino. Ple for automotive braking system with management of impacts from equipment inter- actions. InProceedings of the 20th International Sys- tems and Software Product Line Conference, pages 232–241, 2016

    work page 2016

  22. [22]

    Vehiclee/earchitectureandkeytechnologies enabling software-defined vehicle

    S.Jiang. Vehiclee/earchitectureandkeytechnologies enabling software-defined vehicle. Technical report, SAE Technical Paper, 2024

    work page 2024

  23. [23]

    Kachhoria, S

    R. Kachhoria, S. Jaiswal, R. S. Kharat, S. Pede, S. D. Kale, R. A. Mahajan, P. Sharma, and C. B. Khadse. Retracted article: Adaptive sdn-based network ar- chitecture for vehicle to vehicle communication using flexible optical networks for 5g.Optical and Quantum Electronics, 55(12):1041, 2023

    work page 2023

  24. [24]

    Khamis and P

    A. Khamis and P. Goswami. Rethinking vehicle ar- chitecture through softwarization and servitization. IEEE Access, 13:126213–126226, 2025

    work page 2025

  25. [25]

    Kitchenham.Procedures for Performing System- atic Reviews

    B. Kitchenham.Procedures for Performing System- atic Reviews. Keele University, Keele, 2004

    work page 2004

  26. [26]

    Kitchenham, R

    B. Kitchenham, R. Pretorius, D. Budgen, O. P. Br- ereton, M. Turner, M. Niazi, and S. Linkman. Sys- tematic literature reviews in software engineering-A tertiary study.Information and Software Technology, 52(8):792–805, 2010

    work page 2010

  27. [27]

    Kugele, P

    S. Kugele, P. Obergfell, M. Broy, O. Creighton, M. Traub, and W. Hopfensitz. On service-orientation for automotive software. In2017 IEEE International Conference on Software Architecture (ICSA), pages 193–202. IEEE, 2017

    work page 2017

  28. [28]

    M. Laasch. Maximize the benefit of experience and skill sets within the supply chain.ATZelectronics worldwide, 18:14–17, 2023

    work page 2023

  29. [29]

    Liebetrau

    T. Liebetrau. E/e architecture transformation how it impacts value chain and networking technologies. In AmE 2022-Automotive meets Electronics; 13. GMM- Symposium, pages 1–7. VDE, 2022

    work page 2022

  30. [30]

    Z. Liu, W. Zhang, and F. Zhao. Impact, Challenges and Prospect of Software-Defined Vehicles.Automo- tive Innovation, 5(2):180–194, 4 2022

    work page 2022

  31. [31]

    Z. Liu, W. Zhang, and F. Zhao. Impact, challenges and prospect of software-defined vehicles.Automotive Innovation, 5(2):180–194, 2022

    work page 2022

  32. [32]

    Llopis-Albert, F

    C. Llopis-Albert, F. Rubio, and F. Valero. Impact of digital transformation on the automotive indus- try.Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 162:120343, 1 2021

    work page 2021

  33. [33]

    Lu and W

    S. Lu and W. Shi. Vehicle Computing: Vision and challenges.Journal of Information and Intelligence, 1(1):23–35, 5 2023

    work page 2023

  34. [34]

    Lu and W

    S. Lu and W. Shi. Vehicle computing: Vision and challenges.Journal of Information and Intelligence, 1(1):23–35, 2023

    work page 2023

  35. [35]

    Lu and W

    S. Lu and W. Shi.Vehicle Computing: From Tra- ditional Transportation to Computing on Wheels. Springer, 2024

    work page 2024

  36. [36]

    R. F. Lusch and S. L. Vargo.Service-dominant logic: Premises, perspectives, possibilities. Cambridge Uni- versity Press, 2014

    work page 2014

  37. [37]

    Mahmood, H

    S. Mahmood, H. N. Nguyen, and S. A. Shaikh. Sys- tematic threat assessment and security testing of au- tomotive over-the-air (ota) updates.Vehicular Com- munications, 35:100468, 2022

    work page 2022

  38. [38]

    A. W. Malik, A. U. Rahman, A. Ahmad, and M. M. D. Santos. Over-the-Air Software-Defined Vehicle Updates Using Federated Fog Environment. IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Manage- ment, 19(4):5078–5089, 12 2022

    work page 2022

  39. [39]

    B. Máté, M. Scheerer, R. Sieger, O. Denninger, and J. Henß. Software-defined vehicles: Bridging industry and research perspectives. In2025 IEEE 34th Inter- national Symposium on Industrial Electronics (ISIE), pages 1–6. IEEE, 2025

    work page 2025

  40. [40]

    P. Merlitz. Open-source software-a game changer in automotive engineering?ATZelectronics worldwide, 20:8–11, 2025

    work page 2025

  41. [41]

    L. J. Moukahal, M. A. Elsayed, and M. Zulker- nine. Vehicle software engineering (vse): Research and practice.IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 7(10):10137–10149, 2020. 22

    work page 2020

  42. [42]

    H. A. P. Nair, S. Sri Ramalu, and D. Kumar M. Impact of innovation capacity and anticipatory com- petence on organizational health: A resource based study of nokia, motorola and blackberry.Interna- tional Journal of Economic Research, 11(2):395–415, 2014

    work page 2014

  43. [43]

    Narla, D

    A. Narla, D. Dittler, N. Jazdi, and M. Weyrich. A Framework for Interoperability in Software De- fined Vehicles using Asset Administration Shells. In 2025 IEEE 8th International Conference on Indus- trial Cyber-Physical Systems (ICPS). IEEE, 2025

    work page 2025

  44. [44]

    Nickerson, K

    J. Nickerson, K. Lyytinen, and J. L. King.Auto- mated Vehicles: A Human/Machine Co-learning Per- spective. SAE International, 2022

    work page 2022

  45. [45]

    S. Otto, M. Wlcek, and F. Wortmann. Towards Conceptualizing Software-Defined Vehicles: A Sys- tematic Review and Future Research Avenues. In European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS 2025), page 8, 2025

    work page 2025

  46. [46]

    J. H. Panchal and Z. Wang. Design of Next Gener- ation Automotive Systems: Challenges and Research Opportunities.Journal of Computing and Informa- tion Science in Engineering, 23(6):060818, 2023

    work page 2023

  47. [47]

    J. H. Panchal and Z. Wang. Design of next-generation automotive systems: Challenges and research oppor- tunities.Journal of Computing and Information Sci- ence in Engineering, 23(6):060818, 2023

    work page 2023

  48. [48]

    Parkhurst

    G. Parkhurst. Automated urban buses: an applica- tion of autonomous vehicle technology on route to sustainable development?Transportation Research Procedia, 90:432–439, 2025

    work page 2025

  49. [49]

    Multi-Partner Project: Shaping the Vehicle of the Future - How FEDERATE and HAL4SDV are Steering Europe’s Software-Defined Vehicle Ecosystem

    M.Paulweber, A.Eckel, andP.Azzoni. Multi-Partner Project: Shaping the Vehicle of the Future - How FEDERATE and HAL4SDV are Steering Europe’s Software-Defined Vehicle Ecosystem. InDesign, Au- tomation and Test in Europe Conference and Exhibi- tion (DATE 2025), pages 1–4, Lyon, France, 2025

    work page 2025

  50. [50]

    Peltonen, V

    E. Peltonen, V. Basnayake, N. Elgendy, B. Kämä, P. Seppänen, and T. Päivärinta. Towards data-centric and context-aware decision making in software- defined vehicles. In2025 IEEE 22nd Interna- tional Conference on Software Architecture Compan- ion (ICSA-C), pages 574–577, 2025

    work page 2025

  51. [51]

    Peltonen, V

    E. Peltonen, V. Basnayake, O. Timonen, H. Hietala, Y.Xu, S.Acharya, A.B.Z.Mahmoodi, T.Päivärinta, B. Lampe, M. Driussi, K. Kobiela, R. v. Beusekom, and B. d. Jonge. Software-Defined Vehicle Support and Coordination Project: First Technology Forecast Report. Technical report, Software-Defined Vehicle Support and Coordination Project, 2024

    work page 2024

  52. [52]

    M. Plagge. Paradigmenwechsel in der autoindustrie- von der hard-zur software.ATZelektronik, 18(10):58– 58, 2023

    work page 2023

  53. [53]

    S. G. B. Prasanna, V. Vinod, and A. J. Soman. A system integrator perspective for navigating the future of mobility through software driven vehicles. In2023 IEEE International Transportation Electri- fication Conference (ITEC-India), pages 1–5. IEEE, 2023

    work page 2023

  54. [54]

    V. P. Rao and V. Shankar. Accelerating the develop- ment of Software Defined Vehicles through Innovative Collaboration across the Industry. In2023 IEEE In- ternational Transportation Electrification Conference (ITEC-India), Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd., 2023. IEEE

    work page 2023

  55. [55]

    V. P. Rao and V. Shankar. Accelerating the develop- ment of software defined vehicles through innovative collaboration across the industry. In2023 IEEE In- ternational Transportation Electrification Conference (ITEC-India), pages 1–7. IEEE, 2023

    work page 2023

  56. [56]

    Rehberg and A

    L. Rehberg and A. Brem. Industrial prototyping in the german automotive industry: bridging the gap between physical and virtual prototypes.Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 71:101798, 2024

    work page 2024

  57. [57]

    R. J. Robinson and V. Gorecha. Ai adoption pat- terns among major original equipement manufactur- ers (oems) in automotive industry. In2024 Inter- national Conference on Electrical and Computer En- gineering Researches (ICECER), pages 1–6. IEEE, 2024

    work page 2024

  58. [58]

    R. R. Schreiber and T. Wieland. Inter-organizational collaborations in open-source software ecosystems. Journal of Systems and Software, 235:112765, 2026

    work page 2026

  59. [59]

    Spencer and M

    M. Spencer and M. M. Andreozzi. Real-time porta- bility in software-defined systems. InProceedings of Cyber-Physical Systems and Internet of Things Week 2023, pages 177–178. Association for Computing Ma- chinery, 2023

    work page 2023

  60. [60]

    Szalavetz

    A. Szalavetz. In-house software development for software-defined vehicles: major changes ahead in au- tomotive value chains?International Journal of Au- tomotive Technology and Management, 24(5):22–39, 2024

    work page 2024

  61. [61]

    J. Tang, Y. Chen, D. Zhao, and S. Ji. Research on valueco-creationevolutionmechanismofcross-border cooperation in intelligent connected vehicle industry. Systems, 13(2), 2025

    work page 2025

  62. [62]

    Tripathi, H

    N. Tripathi, H. Hietala, Y. Xu, and R. Liyanage. Stakeholders collaborations, challenges and emerging 23 concepts in digital twin ecosystems.Information and Software Technology, 169:107424, 2024

    work page 2024

  63. [63]

    R. Unseld. Shaping change.ATZelectronics world- wide, 16:16–19, 2021

    work page 2021

  64. [64]

    R. Unseld. Significant action is required in germany. ATZelectronics worldwide, 20(3):14–17, 2025

    work page 2025

  65. [65]

    Valença, C

    G. Valença, C. Alves, and S. Jansen. Strategies for managing power relationships in software ecosystems. Journal of Systems and Software, 144:478–500, 2018

    work page 2018

  66. [66]

    Vetter, P

    A. Vetter, P. Obergfell, H. Guissouma, D. Grimm, M. Rumez, and E. Sax. Development processes in automotive service-oriented architectures. In2020 9th Mediterranean conference on embedded computing (MECO), pages 1–7. IEEE, 2020

    work page 2020

  67. [67]

    Wang and A

    S. Wang and A. Khan. Exploring the factors driving the sustainable consumer intentions for over-the-air updates in electric vehicles.Energy Exploration & Exploitation, 43(1):319–339, 2025

    work page 2025

  68. [68]

    Windpassinger

    H. Windpassinger. On the Way to a Software-defined Vehicle.ATZelectronics worldwide, 17(7-8):48–51, 2022

    work page 2022

  69. [69]

    B.-F. Wu, R. Zhong, Y. Wang, J. Wan, J.-L. Zhang, and W. Shi. Vpi: Vehicle programming interface for vehicle computing.Journal of Computer Science and Technology, 39(1):22–44, 2024

    work page 2024

  70. [70]

    S. Wu. Display-based hmi in the software-defined ve- hicle era. In2021 28th International Workshop on Active-Matrix Flatpanel Displays and Devices (AM- FPD), pages 33–37. IEEE, 2021

    work page 2021

  71. [71]

    Y. Xu, T. Päivärinta, and P. Kuvaja. Digital twins as software and service development ecosystems in industry 4.0: towards a research agenda. InInter- national Conference on Big Data and Security, pages 51–64. Springer, 2020

    work page 2020

  72. [72]

    X. Zhou, Y. Jin, H. Zhang, S. Li, and X. Huang. A map of threats to validity of systematic literature reviews in software engineering. In2016 23rd Asia- Pacific Software Engineering Conference (APSEC), pages 153–160. IEEE, 2016. 24

    work page 2016