A Lean and Highly-automated Model-Based Software Development Process Based on DO-178C/DO-331

Dmitriev, Konstantin; Zafar, Shanza Ali; Schmiechen, Kevin; Lai, Yi-Sheng; Saleab, Micheal; Nagarajan, Pranav; Dollinger, Daniel; Hochstrasser, Markus; Holzapfel, Florian; Myschik, Stephan

doi:10.1109/dasc50938.2020.9256576

Cited by 16 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As L0 for the custom workflow can be set at various hierarchical system levels, the output of the lowest level L{n} are HW and SW item requirements where the latter can serve as input to the subsequent process of MBD according to DO-178C/DO-331 [12]. As section III-B describes, SW requirements can also be model-based and for instance be a referenced Simulink®model within a System Com-poser™component with the stereotype Software Item (see Fig.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In order to conduct system implementation activities afterwards, objectives have to be selected which provide the necessary input to hardware and software development processes. For instance, the latter is addressed in [12] as a subsequent software development process to this custom workflow.…”

Section: A Process Objectives and Selection Conceptmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They are considered as input for the next workflow iteration cycle. On the lowest level L{n}, software and hardware item requirements are developed and can be used for instance as input to the development of electronic hardware ac-cording to DO-254 [14] or model-based software development according to DO-178C/DO-331 [9], [12]. The interrelation of and traceability between hierarchical levels in a Functional Architecture as well as a Physical Architecture model can be achieved by System Composer™components with the stereotypes of Function Groups or Subsystems respectively.…”

Section: Workflow Overview a System Development Activitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The authors assume that in the addressed environment, overall project planning is considered to be sufficient. • At the authors institute, a lightweight configuration management (CM) was designed in GitLab for development arteficts and in Polarion®for documents and requirement baselines [12]. However, the custom workflow does not contain any particular CM activities.…”

Section: Level Of Compliancementioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Be Lean -- How to Fit a Model-Based System Architecture Development Process Based on ARP4754 Into an Agile Environment

Dollinger¹,

Rhein²,

Schmiechen³

et al. 2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An emerging service is moving the known aviation sector in terms of technology, paradigms, and key playersthe Urban Air Mobility. The reason: new developments in nonaviation industries are driving technological progress in aviation. For instance electrical motors, modern sensor technologies and better energy storage expand the possibilities and enable novel vehicle concepts which require also novel system architectures for flight control systems. Their development is governed by aviation authority and industry recognized standards, guidelines and recommended practices. Comprehensive methods for Model-Based Systems Engineering exist which address these guidance materials but their setup and their application can be quite resource-demanding. Especially the new and rather small key players -start-ups and development teams in an educational environment -can be overwhelmed to setup such development processes. For these clients, the authors propose a custom workflow for the development of system architectures. It shall ensure development rigor, quality and consistency. The authors show how the custom workflow has been established based on the ARP4754A and its level of compliance to the standard's process objectives. Based on automation of life cycle activities, manual effort can be reduced to allow the application even in small teams. The custom workflow's activities are explained and demonstrated within a case study of an Experimental Autopilot system architecture.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: A Process Objectives and Selection Conceptmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Workflow Overview a System Development Activitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Level Of Compliancementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Be Lean -- How to Fit a Model-Based System Architecture Development Process Based on ARP4754 Into an Agile Environment

Dollinger¹,

Rhein²,

Schmiechen³

et al. 2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…DO-178C development processes produce software requirements, design, source code, executable object code, and associated trace data. There are multiple known industry practices for the software development workflow, which can be used to satisfy the objectives of DO-178C development processes, such as waterfall, agile, model-based design approach, or a combination thereof [27]. The sequence and relationship of the development activities can vary depending on the selected development workflow, but regardless of the workflow, strong bi-directional traceability must be established and maintained between requirements on all levels, source code, and test data (discussed in DO-178C, Sections 5.5 and 6.5).…”

Section: B Development Processesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Toward Certification of Machine-Learning Systems for Low Criticality Airborne Applications

Dmitriev

Schumann

Holzapfel

2021

2021 IEEE/AIAA 40th Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC)

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The exceptional progress in the field of machine learning (ML) in recent years has attracted a lot of interest in using this technology in aviation. Possible airborne applications of ML include safety-critical functions, which must be developed in compliance with rigorous certification standards of the aviation industry. Current certification standards for the aviation industry were developed prior to the ML renaissance without taking specifics of ML technology into account. There are some fundamental incompatibilities between traditional design assurance approaches and certain aspects of ML-based systems. In this paper, we analyze the current airborne certification standards and show that all objectives of the standards can be achieved for a low-criticality ML-based system if certain assumptions about ML development workflow are applied.

show abstract

Weaving Agility in Safety-Critical Software Development for Aerospace: From Concerns to Opportunities

Eduardo Ferreira Ribeiro,

Silva,

Aguiar

2024

IEEE Access

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Domain-specific standards and documents heavily regulate safety-critical systems. One example is the DO-178C standard for aerospace, which guides organizations to achieve system safety and evidence for their certification. Under such regulated contexts, most organizations use traditional development processes, in contrast to the massive adoption of Agile in the software industry. Among other benefits, Agile methods promise faster delivery and better flexibility to address customer needs. Adopting Agile methods and practices are possible in aerospace because the DO-178C standard does not prescribe concrete software development methods. In spite of that, Agile development is not used in DO-178C contexts. To help change that, our research aims to understand whether and how organizations engineering safety-critical software systems for aerospace may benefit from Agile methods and practices. We analyzed the DO-178C standard and confirm that it is compatible with Agile methods. Then, we present a systematic literature mapping of adopting Agile in software development for aerospace, where we identified significant concerns, recurrent issues, and several challenges. Some real industry aerospace projects provided us with important data and the perspective of domain experts about the pros and cons of Agile methods in this context. We conclude by proposing an agenda of research opportunities to improve safety-critical software development towards agility that we consider worthy of further research, application and confirmation in wider contexts.

show abstract

A Lean and Highly-automated Model-Based Software Development Process Based on DO-178C/DO-331

Cited by 16 publications

References 11 publications

Be Lean -- How to Fit a Model-Based System Architecture Development Process Based on ARP4754 Into an Agile Environment

Be Lean -- How to Fit a Model-Based System Architecture Development Process Based on ARP4754 Into an Agile Environment

Toward Certification of Machine-Learning Systems for Low Criticality Airborne Applications

Weaving Agility in Safety-Critical Software Development for Aerospace: From Concerns to Opportunities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About