MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046991620 · doi:10.1145/1529282.1529362

LTS semantics for use case models

2009· article· en· W2046991620 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Software Engineering Methodologies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSemantics (computer science)PreconditionProgramming languageFormal semantics (linguistics)Operational semanticsFormal specificationSyntaxSoftware engineeringFormal verificationUnified Modeling LanguageSoftwareArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Formalization is a necessary precondition for the specification of precise and unambiguous use case models, which serve as refer-ence points for the design and implementation of software sys-tems. In this paper, we define a formal semantics for use case models. We build on an abstract syntax definition formalizing the sequencing of use case steps. As a semantic domain we have chosen Labeled Transition Systems (LTSs), which, we believe, intuitively capture the behavioral aspects of the use case model. The mapping into LTSs is defined over the various structural elements of the use case model. The proposed formal semantics allows for various semantic checks such as detection of livelocks and validation of model refinement, an important property in an iterative software development lifecycle. We also introduce our tool “Use Case Model Analyzer”.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.300

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.145
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.187 · 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