MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040233837 · doi:10.5555/2682923.2682960

Reducing CTL-live Model Checking to First-Order Logic Validity Checking

2014· article· en· W2040233837 on OpenAlex

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

VenueFormal Methods in Computer-Aided Design · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFormal Methods in Verification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModel checkingComputation tree logicKripke structureCTL*Computer scienceTemporal logicModal μ-calculusAbstraction model checkingTheoretical computer sciencePartial order reductionLivenessLinear temporal logicAbstractionAlgorithmDescription logicMultimodal logicZeroth-order logic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Temporal logic model checking of infinite state systems without the use of iteration or abstraction is usually considered beyond the realm of first-order logic (FOL) reasoners because of the need for a fixpoint computation. In this paper, we show that it is possible to reduce model checking of a finite or infinite Kripke structure that is expressed in FOL to a validity problem in FOL for a fragment of computational tree logic (CTL), which we call CTL-live. CTL-live includes the CTL connectives that are traditionally used to express liveness properties. Our reduction can form the basis for methods that use FOL reasoning techniques directly to accomplish model checking of CTL-live properties without the need for fixpoint operators, transitive closure, abstraction, or induction.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.317
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.181
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.212 · 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