A PARALLEL PROBABILISTIC SYSTEM-LEVEL FAULT DIAGNOSIS APPROACH FOR LARGE MULTIPROCESSOR SYSTEMS
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we present a system-level fault identification algorithm, using a parallel genetic algorithm, for diagnosing faulty nodes in large heterogeneous systems. The algorithm is based on a probabilistic model where individual node fails with an a priori probability p. The assumptions concerning test outcomes are the same as in the PMC model, that is, fault-free testers always give correct test outcomes and faulty testers are totally unpredictable. The parallel diagnosis algorithm was implemented and simulated on randomly generated large systems. The proposed parallelization is intended to speed up the performance of the evolutionary diagnosis approach, hence reducing the computation time by evolving various sub-populations in parallel. Simulation results are provided showing that the parallel diagnosis did improve the efficiency of the evolutionary diagnosis approach, in that it allowed faster diagnosis of faulty situations, making it a viable alternative to existing techniques of diagnosis. Moreover, the evolutionary approach still provide good results even when extreme non-diagnosable faulty situations are considered.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it