MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046971437 · doi:10.1002/smr.527

Model checking timed properties of healthcare processes

2011· article· en· W2046971437 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

VenueJournal of Software Maintenance and Evolution Research and Practice · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFormal Methods in Verification
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCorrectnessModel checkingWorkflowTemporal logicModalitiesProcess (computing)Software engineeringDistributed computingProgramming languageDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Healthcare workflows (careflows) involve complex, distributive processes with a high degree of variability. There are ubiquitous communication and enormous data and knowledge management requirements and the processes involve complex timing requirements, and are safety critical. Designing these processes and managing their performance is difficult and error‐prone. Using verification techniques such as model checking, which are mathematical methods of proving correctness, we can reduce errors by ensuring that process designs satisfy their specifications. We describe a prototype next generation multithreaded model checker to reason about processes in careflows, sensitive to patient preferences and the goals of the careteam using a timed temporal logic extended with modalities of beliefs, desires, and intentions. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.573
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.268
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.123 · 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