What is claimed is:
1. A computer-implemented method for generating auditable symbolic descriptions of software components and automatically verifying compliance from heterogeneous research-and-development (R&D) artifacts, the method comprising:
receiving, by one or more processors, R&D artifacts comprising (i) narrative technical specifications and (ii) diagrammatic flowcharts;
normalizing the R&D artifacts into machine-readable text and vector-graph representations;
parsing the narrative technical specifications with a domain-specific language (DSL) parser configured with a domain grammar to produce a first structured representation comprising typed entities, attributes, and control/data-flow relations;
extracting a second structured representation from the diagrammatic flowcharts by detecting nodes and directed edges and by labeling the nodes and edges with semantic roles inferred from diagram legends, shape conventions, and connector annotations;
aligning terms in at least one of the first structured representation and the second structured representation to a controlled terminology repository comprising canonical terms, synonyms, acronyms, and disambiguation rules, and resolving conflicting meanings according to context and precedence rules to yield a terminology-aligned representation;
merging the first structured representation and the second structured representation into an intermediate, machine-checkable, hierarchical control-and-data-flow model that includes typed components, interfaces, preconditions, postconditions, invariants, data schemas, and inter-component dependencies;
mapping elements of the intermediate model to implementation layers according to a layer taxonomy comprising at least one of: requirements, domain model, service interface, component design, and code-level constructs, the mapping being performed by rule-based hierarchical mapping that references a layer-mapping table stored in a repository;
emitting, from the intermediate model, a symbolic specification in an executable DSL that declares components, interfaces, state variables, contracts, data constraints, and event-driven behaviors with explicit symbol tables and types;
deriving compliance obligations by transforming a compliance corpus comprising machine-readable representations of regulations, standards, and internal policies into formal properties bound to elements of the symbolic specification;
compiling the formal properties into verification artifacts in at least one of temporal logic and satisfiability modulo theories constraints that reference the symbolic specification;
automatically verifying conformance of the symbolic specification to the formal properties by executing at least one of a model checker, a static analyzer, and an SMT solver to produce verification results comprising proofs or counterexamples;
generating an audit artifact comprising (i) a bidirectional traceability matrix linking source R&D artifacts to symbolic specification elements and to the formal properties and verification results, (ii) cryptographic digests of inputs and outputs, and (iii) timestamps; and
outputting compliance findings and, for any nonconformance, machine-generated remediation suggestions that identify implicated elements and propose edits to at least one of the symbolic specification and the layer mapping.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein aligning terms comprises computing candidate mappings using ontology relationships, acronym expansion, and lexical similarity, scoring the candidates using context windows derived from the structured representations, and selecting a mapping when a confidence exceeds a threshold, and otherwise generating a targeted disambiguation prompt.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein extracting the second structured representation further comprises optical character recognition of raster or PDF flowcharts, shape classification of diagram glyphs, and reconstruction of a directed labeled graph with lane- or swimlane-based partitioning.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein the intermediate model is a typed, attributed control/data-flow graph that is canonicalized via graph rewriting rules to remove diagram-specific idiosyncrasies while preserving semantics.
5. The method of claim 1, wherein the layer mapping is performed by applying declarative mapping rules that reference a repository of domain archetypes, such that domain concepts are mapped to APIs at a service layer and to modules at a component layer in accordance with architectural constraints.
6. The method of claim 1, wherein the compliance corpus comprises machine-readable encodings of obligations extracted from at least one of statutes, regulations, industry standards, certification criteria, and organizational policies, each encoding including applicability conditions, parameterizations, and exceptions.
7. The method of claim 1, wherein compiling the formal properties comprises translating obligations into safety and liveness properties with parameter bindings to elements of the symbolic specification, and where applicable adding data integrity and access-control constraints.
8. The method of claim 1, wherein automatically verifying conformance further comprises incremental bounded model checking and counterexample generation with slicing of the symbolic specification to the minimal affected subgraph.
9. The method of claim 1, wherein the audit artifact is digitally signed and stored in an append-only ledger that records provenance of the R&D artifacts, the intermediate model, the symbolic specification, the formal properties, and the verification results.
10. The method of claim 1, further comprising generating instrumented code skeletons in one or more programming languages from the symbolic specification, the code skeletons including runtime assertion checks corresponding to the formal properties.
11. The method of claim 1, further comprising propagating incremental updates by computing a diff of modified R&D artifacts, updating only impacted portions of the intermediate model and symbolic specification, re-evaluating only affected formal properties, and updating the audit artifact with a versioned change log.
12. The method of claim 1, wherein deriving compliance obligations includes evaluating applicability conditions derived from metadata associated with the R&D artifacts and layer mappings, thereby selecting a subset of obligations relevant to a given product scope or deployment context.
13. The method of claim 1, wherein the DSL parser is extensible via pluggable subgrammars that specialize tokenization, typing, and contract templates for distinct regulated domains.
14. The method of claim 1, wherein the symbolic specification includes explicit data lineage annotations that trace the origin, transformations, and sinks of regulated data elements, and wherein verifying conformance includes checking lineage against data-handling constraints in the compliance corpus.
15. The method of claim 1, further comprising redacting or tokenizing personal or confidential information contained in the R&D artifacts prior to storage in the audit artifact, in accordance with classification rules in the compliance corpus.
16. A system comprising one or more processors and non-transitory memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the system to perform the method of any one of claims 1 through 15.
17. The system of claim 16, further comprising a terminology repository service storing canonical terms, synonyms, acronyms, and disambiguation rules, and an application programming interface configured to serve alignment candidates with confidence scores to the instructions.
18. The system of claim 16, further comprising a diagram analysis engine configured to convert raster or vector flowcharts into labeled directed graphs by performing glyph detection, connector tracing, and semantic role labeling.
19. The system of claim 16, wherein the non-transitory memory further stores a compliance rule engine comprising a property compiler that transforms obligations into temporal logic or SMT constraints and a verification orchestrator that schedules model checking or SMT solving tasks and aggregates results into the audit artifact.
20. The system of claim 16, wherein the non-transitory memory further stores an append-only audit ledger configured to record immutable, digitally signed entries corresponding to versions of the R&D artifacts, intermediate models, symbolic specifications, formal properties, and verification results, together with traceability links.
21. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform the method of any one of claims 1 through 15.
