MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1921908778 · doi:10.1109/icm.1998.825580

Modeling and formal verification of a commercial microcontroller for embedded system applications

2002· article· en· W1921908778 on OpenAlexaff
S. Balakrishnan, Sofiène Tahar

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFormal Methods in Verification
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMicrocontrollerCorrectnessEmbedded systemFormal verificationEmbedded softwareInstruction setFlowchartProgramming languageAbstractionAssembly languageSoftwareFormal methodsFormal specificationSet (abstract data type)Software engineeringComputer architecture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Embedded systems are finding widespread application. A formal model for the underlying hardware (RT level) of the microcontroller (PIC 16C71) in commercial use, along with its Instruction Set Architecture (ISA) using Multiway Decision Graphs (MDG) is proposed. Using the MDG verification tools, we verified if the instructions in the instruction set are implemented correctly in the microcontroller hardware. Models for the flowchart specification and the assembly language implementation of an embedded software, used in a mouse controller application are portrayed. Applying the platform of the ISA verification, the correctness of the embedded software has been verified at a higher level of abstraction. Inconsistencies in the assembly code with respect to the specification, as published in the application notes of the manufacturer, were uncovered through our experiments.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations4
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFormal Methods in VerificationFrench-language works237,207