MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996090276 · doi:10.1142/s0218194005002051

A NEW APPROACH IN DESIGNING INTERPROCESS COMMUNICATION FOR REAL-TIME SYSTEMS

2005· article· en· W1996090276 on OpenAlexaff
Larry Hughes, Hosein Marzi, Yan-Ting Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReal-Time Systems Scheduling
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier UniversityDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInter-process communicationComputer scienceProcess (computing)Distributed computingMessage passingSoftwareEvent (particle physics)Set (abstract data type)Embedded systemOperating systemReal-time computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In networked and distributed environments, and in multi-tasking systems, processes run simultaneously and compete to access the system resources. Processes commonly communicate with one another. Various techniques have been adapted in designing Interprocess Communication mechanisms within operating systems such as signals and message-passing. Signals are software interrupts notifying a process that an event has occurred; they do not support data exchange between processes. Message-Passing, a widely used technique in this design, it may use pipes to allow two or more processes to exchange data. Current techniques degrade performance of Real-time Systems, where unmet time critical missions may result in catastrophic failure. This research introduces a library-based architecture for Interprocess Communication Systems (IPC). This technique supports real-time performance and can be adapted for embedded operating systems. Improved Real-time performance was achieved by running IPC as a set of library function and verified by testing on real-time embedded system.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.244
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
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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge EngineeringSame topicReal-Time Systems SchedulingFrench-language works237,207