Analysis of Companies Gaps in the Application of Standards for Safety-Critical Software

  • Andrea CeccarelliEmail author
  • Nuno Silva
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9338)


The introduction of a new standard for safety-critical systems in a company usually requires investments in training and tools to achieve a deep understanding of the processes, the techniques and the required technological support. In general, for a new standard that is desired to be introduced, it is both relevant and challenging to rate the capability of the company to apply the standard, and consequently to estimate the effort in its adoption. Additionally, questions on the maturity in the application of such standard may still persist for a long time after its introduction. Focusing on prescriptive software standards for critical systems, this paper presents a framework for gap analysis that measures the compliance of a company’s practices, knowledge and skills with the requirements of a standard for the development of safety-critical systems. The framework is exercised in a company to rate its maturity in the usage of the avionic standard DO-178B.


Gap analysis Standards Certification Safety-critical systems Aerospace DO-178B 



This work has been partially supported by the European Project FP7-2012-324334-CECRIS and the TENACE PRIN Project (n. 20103P34XC) funded by the Italian Ministry of Education, University and Research.


  1. 1.
    IET, Competence Criteria for Safety-related system practitioners (2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    RTCA DO-178B/EUROCAE ED-12B - Software Considerations in Airborne Systems and Equipment Certification, December 1992Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ceccarelli, A., Silva, N.: Qualitative comparison of aerospace standards: An objective approach. In: IEEE International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering Workshops, pp. 331–336 (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    CMMI Product Team, CMMI for Development. Software Engineering Institute, CMU, Pennsylvania, Technical Report (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    ISO 9001:2008 Quality Management Systems (2008)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Esposito, C., Cotroneo, D., Silva, N.: Investigation on safety-related standards for critical systems. In: IEEE International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering Workshops, pp. 49–54 (2011)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    CENELEC EN 50126-1/EC:2006-05, Railway applications - The specification and demonstration of Reliability, Availability, Maintainability and Safety (RAMS) Part 1: Basic requirements and generic process (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    ISO/IEC 15504 Information technology - Process assessment (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Verband der Automobilindustrie (VDA), Automotive SPICE - Process Assessment Model, 1st Edition (2008)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Duchi, F., Antunes, N., Ceccarelli, A., Vella, G., Rossi, F., Bondavalli, A.: Cost-effective testing for critical off-the-shelf services. In: Bondavalli, A., Ceccarelli, A., Ortmeier, F. (eds.) SAFECOMP 2014. LNCS, vol. 8696, pp. 231–242. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ceccarelli, A., et al.: Design and implementation of real-time wearable devices for a safety-critical track warning system. In: High-Assurance Systems Engineering (HASE), pp. 147–154 (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Margarido, I.L., Faria, J.P., Vidal, R.M., Vieira, M.: Towards a framework to evaluate and improve the quality of implementation of CMMI® practices. In: Dieste, O., Jedlitschka, A., Juristo, N. (eds.) PROFES 2012. LNCS, vol. 7343, pp. 361–365. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gallina, B., et al.: Modeling a safety-and automotive-oriented process line to enable reuse and flexible process derivation. In: IEEE COMPSACW, pp. 504–509 (2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CINI-University of FlorenceFlorenceItaly
  2. 2.CRITICAL Software S.A.CoimbraPortugal

Personalised recommendations