MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005214031 · doi:10.1145/2635868.2635911

Verifying CTL-live properties of infinite state models using an SMT solver

2014· article· en· W2005214031 on OpenAlexaff
Amirhossein Vakili, Nancy A. Day

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFormal Methods in Verification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModel checkingCTL*Computer scienceSolverSatisfiability modulo theoriesComputation tree logicLivenessTheoretical computer scienceAbstractionState (computer science)Abstraction model checkingOperator (biology)Abstract interpretationAlgorithmSoftwareProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ability to create and analyze abstract models is an important step in conquering software complexity. In this paper, we show that it is practical to verify dynamic properties of infinite state models expressed in a subset of CTL directly using an SMT solver without iteration, abstraction, or human intervention. We call this subset CTL-Live and it consists of the operators of CTL expressible using the least fixed point operator of the mu-calculus, which are commonly considered liveness properties (e.g., AF, AU). We show that using this method the verification of an infinite state model can sometimes complete more quickly than verifying a finite version of the model. We also examine modelling techniques to represent abstract models in first-order logic that facilitate this form of model checking.

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)0.003
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.146 · 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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFormal Methods in VerificationFrench-language works237,207