MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037407649 · doi:10.1109/tase.2012.14

A Formal Diagrammatic Approach to Timed Workflow Modelling

2012· article· en· W2037407649 on OpenAlexaff
Hao Wang, Adrian Rutle, Wendy MacCaull

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBusiness Process Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiagrammatic reasoningWorkflowComputer scienceRotation formalisms in three dimensionsFormal specificationPetri netGraph rewritingTheoretical computer scienceGraphProgramming languagePredicate (mathematical logic)Software engineeringDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A workflow model is an abstract representation of a real life workflow and consists of interconnected tasks depicting the desired executions of real life activities. Time information is an important aspect of many safety-critical workflows. This paper presents a new formal diagrammatic approach to timed workflow modelling involving principles from model-driven engineering. The approach extends the Diagram Predicate Framework, which is based on category theory and graph transformations, for the specification of workflow modelling formalisms. We develop a transition system to represent the dynamic semantics involving time in which transitions are described by specification transformations between instances. To model time, we use predicates for time delay and duration with transition rules for time advancement.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations9
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBusiness Process Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207