Verifying Real-Time Systems using Explicit-time Description Methods
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
Timed model checking has been extensively researched in recent years. Many new formalisms with time extensions and tools based on them have been presented. On the other hand, Explicit-Time Description Methods aim to verify real-time systems with general untimed model checkers. Lamport presented an explicit-time description method using a clock-ticking process (Tick) to simulate the passage of time together with a group of global variables for time requirements. This paper proposes a new explicit-time description method with no reliance on global variables. Instead, it uses rendezvous synchronization steps between the Tick process and each system process to simulate time. This new method achieves better modularity and facilitates usage of more complex timing constraints. The two explicit-time description methods are implemented in DIVINE, a well-known distributed-memory model checker. Preliminary experiment results show that our new method, with better modularity, is comparable to Lamport's method with respect to time and memory efficiency.
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 | 0.009 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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