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

• Type: Article in International Scientific Journal
• Date: 2024

Authors

Ribeiro, JEF (Author) Other; Silva, JG (Author) Other; Ademar Aguiar (Author) FEUP

Journal

Title: IEEE Access

Vol. 12

ISSN: 2169-3536

Publisher: IEEE

Indexing

ISI Web of Knowledge - 0 Citations

Scopus - 1 Citation

Other information

Authenticus ID: P-010-A1C

DOI: 10.1109/access.2024.3387730

Abstract (EN): 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.

Language: English

Type (Professor's evaluation): Scientific

No. of pages: 25