MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052838808 · doi:10.1115/detc2011-47928

A Method for Simultaneously Satisfying Important Constraints and Dependencies for Many Different Types of Processes in Embedded Real-Time Systems

2011· article· en· W2052838808 on OpenAlexaff
Jia Xu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReal-Time Systems Scheduling
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceAsynchronous communicationProcess (computing)Distributed computingComputationConstraint (computer-aided design)Theoretical computer scienceAlgorithmProgramming languageMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In most embedded, real-time applications, processes need to satisfy various important constraints and dependencies, such as release times, offsets, precedence relations, and exclusion relations. Embedded, real-time systems with high assurance requirements often must execute many different types of processes with such constraints and dependencies. Some of the processes may be periodic and some of them may be asynchronous. Some of the processes may have hard deadlines and some of them may have soft deadlines. For some of the processes, especially the hard real-time processes, complete knowledge about their characteristics can and must be acquired before run-time. For other processes, prior knowledge of their worst case computation time and their data requirements may not be available. It is important for many embedded real-time systems to be able to simultaneously satisfy as many important constraints and dependencies as possible for as many different types of processes as possible. In this paper, we discuss what types of important constraints and dependencies can be satisfied among what types of processes. We also present a method which guarantees that, for every process, no matter whether it is periodic or asynchronous, and no matter whether it has a hard deadline or a soft deadline, as long as the characteristics of that process are known before run-time, then that process will be guaranteed to be completed before predetermined time limits, while simultaneously satisfying many important constraints and dependencies with other processes.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReal-Time Systems SchedulingFrench-language works237,207