MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1566315049 · doi:10.14279/tuj.eceasst.66.887

From System Requirements to Software Requirements in the Four-Variable Model

2024· article· en· W1566315049 on OpenAlex
Lucian M. Patcas, Mark Lawford, Tom Maibaum

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFormal Methods in Verification
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceInterfacingSoftware requirements specificationSoftware requirementsSoftware constructionSoftwareSoftware systemSoftware developmentSystem requirementsImplementationSoftware engineeringProgramming languageOperating systemComputer hardware

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The four-variable model of software-controlled embedded systems originally proposed by Parnas and Madey has been used successfully in the development of safety-critical applications in various industries. The model does not explicitly specify the software requirements, but rather bounds them by specifying the system requirements and the input and output hardware interfaces of the system. The software engineers are left with the problem of how to construct software that satisfies the system requirements and hardware interfacing constraints. After formalizing the properties of acceptable system and software implementations using the demonic calculus of relations, we provide (i) a necessary and sufficient condition for the existence of an acceptable software implementation and (ii) a mathematical characterization of the software requirements in terms of their weakest specification.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score0.415

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFormal Methods in VerificationFrench-language works237,207