MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007822392 · doi:10.4271/2011-01-2530

Verification and Validation of Complex Systems

2011· article· en· W2007822392 on OpenAlex
Hussein Youssef

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

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFormal Methods in Verification
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">This paper explores the problem of complex safety/security critical software Validation and Verification (V&V). Current methods of V&V, which certify that the software is fit for use, require a significant amount of touch labor - future complex software developments such as NextGen Air Traffic Control will face cost hurdles so high that it may not be deployable. We will take the current V&V technology beyond formal methods (the current state of the art), reducing the V&V problem to an <b><i>NP-Hard</i></b> optimization problem solvable by emerging Adiabatic Quantum Computing (AQC) hardware and processing methods. The Quantum V&V (QVV) approach can go beyond software V&V, and can span the entire complex system.</div></div>

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.230 · 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