MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W180087852

Validation of Remote Object Invocation and Object Migration in CORBA GIOP using Promela/Spin

2002· article· en· W180087852 on OpenAlexaff
Moataz Kamel, Stefan Leue

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed systems and fault tolerance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPromelaCommon Object Request Broker ArchitectureComputer scienceProtocol (science)InteroperabilityObject (grammar)Programming languageModel checkingOperating systemArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The General Inter-Orb Protocol (GIOP) is a key component of the OMG's Common Object Request Broker Architecture (CORBA) specification. GIOP specifies a standard protocol that enables interoperability between ORBs from different vendors. This paper presents the formal modeling and validation of the GIOP protocol using the Promela/Spin package. We discuss a Promela model of a GIOP system which includes remote object invocation and server object migration. We elicit high-level properties based on the informal GIOP specification and verify whether these hold of the GIOP model using the Spin model checker. The high-level requirements that we have elicited were confirmed during the validation. However, in the course of the validation two potential problems related to CancelRequest messages and server migration were discovered, and one known deadlock situation of the underlying transport protocol was confirmed. On leave from the University of Waterloo, Department of Electrical and Computer ...

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.230 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations11
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDistributed systems and fault toleranceFrench-language works237,207