MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1866373754 · doi:10.1109/cds.1998.675770

Using meta-interfaces to support secure dynamic system reconfiguration

2002· article· en· W1866373754 on OpenAlexafffund
Michael Horie, James C. Pang, Eric G. Manning, Gholamali C. Shoja

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSecurity and Verification in Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersUniversity of Victoria
KeywordsComputer scienceControl reconfigurationArchitectureDistributed computingEmbedded systemSystems designService (business)Software engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Today's operating system designers face a daunting challenge: they must design systems that can support a great diversity of applications in a secure, efficient, reliable, and effective fashion. The challenge becomes even more daunting when some of the applications and their requirements cannot even be envisioned until after the system has been deployed for some time. One solution lies in designing systems that can be reconfigured and enhanced throughout their life-cycle by applications. However, opening up an operating system to application-initiated changes can significantly weaken the integrity of a system. This paper presents a system architecture that accommodates dynamic reconfigurations securely and efficiently, without exposing applications to unconfined complexity and risk. It also discusses a prototype implementation of this system architecture, and our first experience at dynamically extending the system scheduler without loss of service to running applications.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.009
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.165
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.150 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations9
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSecurity and Verification in ComputingFrench-language works237,207