MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966387664 · doi:10.1145/1071021.1071031

From UML to LQN by XML algebra-based model transformations

2005· article· en· W1966387664 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware System Performance and Reliability
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceUnified Modeling LanguageModel transformationApplications of UMLProgramming languageRotation formalisms in three dimensionsUML toolGraph rewritingObject Constraint LanguageXMLTheoretical computer scienceSoftware engineeringData miningSoftwareGraphArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The change of focus from code to models promoted by OMG's Model Driven Development raises the need for verification of non-functional characteristics of UML models. such as performance, reliability, scalability, security, etc. Many modeling formalisms, techniques and tools have been developed over the years for the analysis of different non-functional characteristics. The challenge is not to reinvent new analysis methods for UML models, but to bridge the gap between UML-based software development tools and different kinds of existing analysis tools. Traditionally, the analysis models were built "by hand". However, a new trend is starting to emerge, that involves the automatic transformation of UML models (annotated with extra information) into various kinds of analysis models. This paper proposes a transformation method of an annotated UML model into a performance model. The mapping between the input model and the output model is defined at a higher level of abstraction based on graph transformation concepts, whereas the implementation of the transformation rules and algorithm uses lower-level XML trees manipulations techniques, such as XML algebra. The target performance model used as an example in this paper is the Layered Queueing Network (LQN); however, the transformation approach can be easily tailored to other performance modelling formalisms.

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 score0.810
Threshold uncertainty score0.920

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.225 · 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