The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Framework and tooling proposals for Agile certification of safety-critical embedded software in avionic systems
Open accessAbstract
—The abstract must be between 150–250 words. This article focuses on quality improvement in the development of DO-178C/ED-12C safety-critical software, optimizing development costs through the implementation of a “continuous certification” integral process. We discuss the major problems associated with traditional, V-cycle software development practices, and highlight the many advantages of adopting a “continuous certification” process based on a more Agile approach. The article proposes a framework for deploying this process, explaining the development of the framework and demonstrating its compliance with the requirements of certification standards. We also propose a tooling based on open-source, off-the-shelf solutions to implement the framework and illustrate its efficiency and effectiveness on an industrial case study.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Requirements of software safety standard (DO-178C): Development Assurance Level (DAL): Five levels of software criticality: A (most critical) through E (least critical) [66].”
From A requirements model for AI algorithms in functional safety-critical systems with an explainable self-enforcing network from a developer perspective (2024) · cites this paper as [66]
In the citing paper
“Coding standards: traceability and efficiency of the source code [66]; for AI methods, further specification is required (e.g., [75]).”
From A requirements model for AI algorithms in functional safety-critical systems with an explainable self-enforcing network from a developer perspective (2024) · cites this paper as [66]
In the citing paper
“Process-based safety arguments: designed specifically for NN used in safety-related applications [66]; for reinforcement learning, e.g., [69].”
From A requirements model for AI algorithms in functional safety-critical systems with an explainable self-enforcing network from a developer perspective (2024) · cites this paper as [66]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Research works printed but not linked: 14
- Baron, C., Louis, V., 2021, Towards a continuous certification of safety-critical avionics software. Comput. Ind., vol. 125. 〈https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2020.103382〉. · DOI
- Edeki, 2015, Agile software development methodology, Eur. J. Math. Comput. Sci., 2, 2015
- Gallina, Barbara, Nyberg, Mattias, 2015. Reconciling the ISO 26262-compliant and the agile documentation management in the Swedish context. In: Proceedings of the third Workshop on Critical Automotive applications: Robustness & Safety (CARS), Joint Event of EDCC-2015, Paris, France.
- Gallina, Barbara, Muram, Faiz Ul, Patricia, Julieth, Ardila, Castellanos, 2018. Compliance of agilized (software) development processes with safety standards: a vision. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Agile Development of Safety-critical Software (ASCS), May 21st. Porto, Portugal. · DOI
- Hilderman, 2009, DO-178B costs versus benefits, HighRely White Pap.
- Laprie, 1996, Guide de la sûreté de fonctionnement, Cépaduès
- Lemoussu, 2018, Systems engineering and project management process modeling in the aeronautics context: the SMEs study case, Int. J. Mech. Mechatron. Eng., 12, 88
- Louis, 2019, Vers une certification continue des logiciels critiques en aéronautique, Tech. l′Ingénieur, 27
- Marsden, J., Windisch, A., Villermin, J., Aventini, C., Mayo, R., Grossi, J., Fabre, L., 2018. ED-12C/DO-178C vs. Agile manifesto – a solution to agile development of certifiable avionics systems. In: Proceedings of the Conférence Embedded Real Time Software and Systems (ERTS2). Toulouse, France.
- Mrabti, A., Gautherot, D., Brossard, V., Moy, Y., Pothon, F., 2018. Safe and secure autopilot software for drones. In: Proceedings of the Conférence Embedded Real Time Software and Systems (ERTS2). Toulouse, France.
- Rahman, 2015, Synthesizing continuous deployment practices used in software development, Agil. Conf., 1
- Rempel, Patrick, Mäder, Patrick, Kuschke, Tobias, Cleland-Huang, Jane, 2014. Mind the gap: assessing the conformance of software traceability to relevant guidelines. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE). ACM, New York, USA, pp. 943–54. · DOI
- Steghöfer, Jan-Philipp, Knauss, Eric, Horkoff, Jennifer, Wohlrab, Rebekka, 2019. Challenges of Scaled Agile for Safety-Critical Systems. · DOI
- Veeresh Thummadi, B., Shiv Omri, Berente Nicholas, Lyytinen, Kalle, 2011. Enacted software development routines based on waterfall and agile software methods: socio-technical event sequence study. In: Proceedings of the Service-Oriented Perspectives in Design Science Research – 6th International Conference, DESRIST 2011/ Milwaukee, WI, USA. Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6629). · DOI
Cited by
Klüver, C., Greisbach, A., Kindermann, M., & Püttmann, B. (2024) · Security and Safety · doi:10.1051/sands/2024020 · Cited by 8
“Prototypes are selected representative instances from the data, and criticisms are instances that are not well represented by these prototypes.”
Metadata
- Authors
- Baron, C., & Louis, V.
- Affiliations
- Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
- DGA Techniques aérospatiales (FR)
- Corresponding author
- Baron, Claude
- ORCID
- Baron, Claude
- Venue
- Computers in Industry
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2023-06
- Volume
- 148
- Pages
- 103887
- ISSN
- 0166-3615 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4360612185
- Cited by
- 12
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 7
- FWCI
- 2.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
- www.elsevier.com/legal/tdmrep-license (tdm)
- www.elsevier.com/open-access/userlicense/1.0/ (am, 293 d)
- doi.org/10.15223/policy-017 (stm-asf)
- doi.org/10.15223/policy-037 (stm-asf)
- doi.org/10.15223/policy-012 (stm-asf)
- doi.org/10.15223/policy-029 (stm-asf)
- doi.org/10.15223/policy-004 (stm-asf)
- Locations
- Computers in Industry (acceptedVersion)
- HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality › Safety Systems Engineering in Autonomy
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Hardware and Architecture › Real-Time Systems Scheduling
- Keywords
- agile software development, software certification, safety-critical software, avionics software, DO-178C, continuous certification, embedded software, software quality assurance
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
