Beyond Tradition: Evaluating Agile feasibility in DO-178C for Aerospace Software Development

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2311.04344v1
• Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2023 20:58:02 GMT
• Title: Beyond Tradition: Evaluating Agile feasibility in DO-178C for Aerospace Software Development
• Authors: J. Eduardo Ferreira Ribeiro, Jo\~ao Gabriel Silva, Ademar Aguiar
• Abstract summary: Domain-specific standards and guidelines play a crucial role in regulating safety-critical systems. This paper analyses the DO-178C document within the context of software development for safety-critical aerospace systems.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Domain-specific standards and guidelines play a crucial role in regulating safety-critical systems, with one notable example being the DO-178C document for the aerospace industry. This document provides guidelines for organisations seeking to ensure the safety and certification of their software systems. This paper analyses the DO-178C document within the context of software development for safety-critical aerospace systems focusing on Agile software development, aiming to assess its feasibility. Unlike restricting specific development methods, DO-178C offers indispensable support that upholds confidence in safety, aligning seamlessly with the objectives of aerospace industries. Our analysis reveals that there are no limitations or restrictions within the DO-178C that inhibit the adoption of Agile and provides guidelines and objectives for achieving suitable evidence, allowing for various working methods, including Agile methods, contrary to the overall opinion in the industry that the traditional waterfall method is mandatory. Additionally, we emphasise that the guidelines explanation is explicitly tailored to software professionals using Agile methods, giving it a much more specific focus than publications that only provide a generic overview of the standard.

Related papers

• Constitutional Spec-Driven Development: Enforcing Security by Construction in AI-Assisted Code Generation [0.0]
  AI-assisted "vibe coding" enables rapid software development but introduces significant security risks.<n>We present Constitutional Spec-Driven Development, a methodology that embeds non-negotiable security principles into the specification.<n>We show that constitutional constraints reduce security defects by 73% compared to unconstrained AI generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-31T19:08:16Z)
• From Detection to Prevention: Explaining Security-Critical Code to Avoid Vulnerabilities [2.490168997159702]
  This work explores a proactive strategy to prevent vulnerabilities by highlighting code regions that implement security-critical functionality.<n>We present an IntelliJ IDEA plugin prototype that uses code-level software metrics to identify potentially security-critical methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-31T13:16:01Z)
• Frontier AI Auditing: Toward Rigorous Third-Party Assessment of Safety and Security Practices at Leading AI Companies [57.521647436515785]
  We define frontier AI auditing as rigorous third-party verification of frontier AI developers' safety and security claims.<n>We introduce AI Assurance Levels (AAL-1 to AAL-4), ranging from time-bounded system audits to continuous, deception-resilient verification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-16T18:44:09Z)
• A Practical Implementation of Customized Scrum-Based Agile Framework in Aerospace Software Development Under DO-178C Constraints [0.0]
  This study presents an empirically validated Scrum-based Agile framework tailored for DO-178C compliant, safety-critical aerospace software.<n>The framework adapts core Scrum roles, artifacts, and events to meet certification, verification, and independence objectives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-18T07:45:34Z)
• CertiA360: Enhance Compliance Agility in Aerospace Software Development [0.0]
  This study proposes CertiA360, a tool designed to help teams improve requirement maturity, automate the changes in traceability, and align with the regulatory objectives.<n>The tool was designed and validated in close collaboration with aerospace industry experts, using their feedback to ensure practical application and real-life effectiveness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-14T18:41:11Z)
• Bridging the Mobile Trust Gap: A Zero Trust Framework for Consumer-Facing Applications [51.56484100374058]
  This paper proposes an extended Zero Trust model designed for mobile applications operating in untrusted, user-controlled environments.<n>Using a design science methodology, the study introduced a six-pillar framework that supports runtime enforcement of trust.<n>The proposed model offers a practical and standards-aligned approach to securing mobile applications beyond pre-deployment controls.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-20T18:42:36Z)
• Watermarking Without Standards Is Not AI Governance [46.71493672772134]
  We argue that current implementations risk serving as symbolic compliance rather than delivering effective oversight.<n>We propose a three-layer framework encompassing technical standards, audit infrastructure, and enforcement mechanisms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-27T18:10:04Z)
• Advancing Embodied Agent Security: From Safety Benchmarks to Input Moderation [52.83870601473094]
  Embodied agents exhibit immense potential across a multitude of domains. Existing research predominantly concentrates on the security of general large language models. This paper introduces a novel input moderation framework, meticulously designed to safeguard embodied agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-22T08:34:35Z)
• From Waterfallish Aerospace Certification onto Agile Certifiable Iterations [0.0]
  We present a strategy and tools that support the generation of continuous documentation complying with DO-178C requirements. By iteratively creating the DO-178C documentation associated with each software component, we open the way to truly continuous certifiable iterations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-06T09:49:57Z)
• AILuminate: Introducing v1.0 of the AI Risk and Reliability Benchmark from MLCommons [62.374792825813394]
  This paper introduces AILuminate v1.0, the first comprehensive industry-standard benchmark for assessing AI-product risk and reliability. The benchmark evaluates an AI system's resistance to prompts designed to elicit dangerous, illegal, or undesirable behavior in 12 hazard categories.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-19T05:58:52Z)
• Towards Exception Safety Code Generation with Intermediate Representation Agents Framework [54.03528377384397]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) often struggle with robust exception handling in generated code, leading to fragile programs that are prone to runtime errors.<n>We propose Seeker, a novel multi-agent framework that enforces exception safety in LLM generated code through an Intermediate Representation (IR) approach.<n>Seeker decomposes exception handling into five specialized agents: Scanner, Detector, Predator, Ranker, and Handler.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-09T14:45:45Z)
• Analysis of Functional Insufficiencies and Triggering Conditions to Improve the SOTIF of an MPC-based Trajectory Planner [2.555222031881788]
  Safety-of-the-intended-function (SOTIF) has moved into the center of attention, whose standard, ISO21448, has only been released in 2022. This paper aims to make two main contributions: (1) an analysis of the SOTIF for a generic MPC-based trajectory planner and (2) an interpretation and concrete application of the generic procedures described in ISO21448.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-31T12:52:13Z)
• AIR-Bench 2024: A Safety Benchmark Based on Risk Categories from Regulations and Policies [80.90138009539004]
  AIR-Bench 2024 is the first AI safety benchmark aligned with emerging government regulations and company policies. It decomposes 8 government regulations and 16 company policies into a four-tiered safety taxonomy with granular risk categories in the lowest tier. We evaluate leading language models on AIR-Bench 2024, uncovering insights into their alignment with specified safety concerns.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-11T21:16:48Z)
• INDICT: Code Generation with Internal Dialogues of Critiques for Both Security and Helpfulness [110.6921470281479]
  We introduce INDICT: a new framework that empowers large language models with Internal Dialogues of Critiques for both safety and helpfulness guidance. The internal dialogue is a dual cooperative system between a safety-driven critic and a helpfulness-driven critic. We observed that our approach can provide an advanced level of critiques of both safety and helpfulness analysis, significantly improving the quality of output codes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-23T15:55:07Z)
• Towards Guaranteed Safe AI: A Framework for Ensuring Robust and Reliable AI Systems [88.80306881112313]
  We will introduce and define a family of approaches to AI safety, which we will refer to as guaranteed safe (GS) AI. The core feature of these approaches is that they aim to produce AI systems which are equipped with high-assurance quantitative safety guarantees. We outline a number of approaches for creating each of these three core components, describe the main technical challenges, and suggest a number of potential solutions to them.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-10T17:38:32Z)
• What Can Self-Admitted Technical Debt Tell Us About Security? A Mixed-Methods Study [6.286506087629511]
  Self-Admitted Technical Debt (SATD) can be deemed as dreadful sources of information on potentially exploitable vulnerabilities and security flaws. This work investigates the security implications of SATD from a technical and developer-centred perspective.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-23T13:48:49Z)
• No Trust without regulation! [0.0]
  The explosion in performance of Machine Learning (ML) and the potential of its applications are encouraging us to consider its use in industrial systems. It is still leaving too much to one side the issue of safety and its corollary, regulation and standards. The European Commission has laid the foundations for moving forward and building solid approaches to the integration of AI-based applications that are safe, trustworthy and respect European ethical values.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-27T09:08:41Z)
• Validation-Driven Development [54.50263643323]
  This paper introduces a validation-driven development (VDD) process that prioritizes validating requirements in formal development. The effectiveness of the VDD process is demonstrated through a case study in the aviation industry.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-11T09:15:26Z)
• Building a Credible Case for Safety: Waymo's Approach for the Determination of Absence of Unreasonable Risk [2.2386635730984117]
  A safety case for fully autonomous operations is a formal way to explain how a company determines that an AV system is safe. It involves an explanation of the system, the methodologies used to develop it, the metrics used to validate it and the actual results of validation tests. This paper helps enabling such alignment by providing foundational thinking into how a system is determined to be ready for deployment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-02T21:05:39Z)
• Evaluating Model-free Reinforcement Learning toward Safety-critical Tasks [70.76757529955577]
  This paper revisits prior work in this scope from the perspective of state-wise safe RL. We propose Unrolling Safety Layer (USL), a joint method that combines safety optimization and safety projection. To facilitate further research in this area, we reproduce related algorithms in a unified pipeline and incorporate them into SafeRL-Kit.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-12T06:30:17Z)
• Correct-by-Construction Runtime Enforcement in AI -- A Survey [3.509295509987626]
  Enforcement refers to the theories, techniques, and tools for enforcing correct behavior with respect to a formal specification of systems at runtime. We discuss how safety is traditionally handled in the field of AI and how more formal guarantees on the safety of a self-learning agent can be given by integrating a runtime enforcer.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-08-30T17:45:38Z)
• Empowered and Embedded: Ethics and Agile Processes [60.63670249088117]
  We argue that ethical considerations need to be embedded into the (agile) software development process. We put emphasis on the possibility to implement ethical deliberations in already existing and well established agile software development processes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-15T11:14:03Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.