MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1483694396 · doi:10.1109/ictta.2006.1684961

Two architectures for testing distributed real-time systems

2006· article· en· W1483694396 on OpenAlexaff
Sinchita Siddiquee, Abdeslam En‐Nouaary

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFormal Methods in Verification
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceAutomatonCommon Object Request Broker ArchitectureFormal specificationFactor (programming language)Distributed computingConformance testingTimed automatonJavaProcess (computing)Software architectureReal-time operating systemReal-time computingEmbedded systemSoftwareSoftware engineeringProgramming languageOperating systemTheoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A real-time system is a system that is required to react to stimuli from the environment within time intervals dictated by the environment. In real-time applications, the timing requirements are the main constraints and their mastering is the predominant factor for assessing the quality of service. The safety-critical nature of their domain and their inherent complexity advocate the use of formal methods in the software development process. Testing is one of the formal techniques that can be used to ensure the quality ofreal-time systems. This paper addresses andproposes a centralized architecture and a distributed architecture for the execution of test cases on distributed real-time systems. These two architectures are implemented in CORBA and JAVA. The specification model used is n-ports Timed Input Output Automata, a variant of timed automata of Alur and Dill [1].

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.265 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFormal Methods in VerificationFrench-language works237,207