Design of a Functional Size Measurement Procedure for Real-Time Embedded Software Requirements Expressed using the Simulink Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To obtain the functional size of software and reduce measurement variance caused by the interpretations of individual measurers, a number of measurement procedureshave been designed based on measurement methods approved as international standards. To date, most of these procedures have targeted Management Information Systems software, while only a few were designed for real-time and reactiveembedded software. In this paper, we propose a functional size measurement (FSM) procedure for real-time embedded software, based on the COSMIC method, version 3.0.1 (ISO 19761), and with requirements documented using the Simulinkmodel. The design of this FSM procedure is based on the mapping of key concepts in both Simulink and COSMIC, and the identification of the mapping rules for extracting the information stored in the Simulink files that is required formeasurement. This procedure therefore provides the foundation for automating the measurement of software requirements documented using Simulink. The backgroundstudy for this procedure was conducted at Renault SAS using ECU (Electronic Control Unit) functional requirements expressed with the Simulink tool.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".