MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1960366695 · doi:10.1109/etfa.2015.7301505

Static slack-based instrumentation of programs

2015· article· en· W1960366695 on OpenAlex

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
TopicReal-Time Systems Scheduling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInstrumentation (computer programming)Computer scienceBenchmark (surveying)SuiteCode (set theory)SoftwareTRACE (psycholinguistics)Embedded systemReal-time computingOperating systemProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Real-time embedded programs are time sensitive and, to trace such programs, the instrumentation mechanism must honor the programs' timing constraints. We present a time-aware instrumentation technique that injects program code with slack-based conditional instrumentation. The central idea is to execute instrumentation code only when its execution does not increase the worst-case execution time beyond a program's deadline. This occurs at run-time. Unlike previous efforts, this work allows instrumenting on the path that results in the worst-case execution time of the program. We propose a software, and a hardware method of allowing for slack-based conditional instrumentation. We evaluate and compare these two alternatives using a common benchmark suite for real-time systems. Our results show that, on average, the two proposed methods achieve 57% and 80% instrumentation coverage, respectively, compared to only a 3% coverage by previous work.

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)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.929
Threshold uncertainty score0.203

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReal-Time Systems SchedulingFrench-language works237,207