MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070233995 · doi:10.1145/2678022

Dynamically Instrumenting the QEMU Emulator for Linux Process Trace Generation with the GDB Debugger

2014· article· en· W2070233995 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

VenueACM Transactions on Embedded Computing Systems · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Testing and Debugging Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceDebuggingTRACE (psycholinguistics)EmulationTracingOperating systemProcess (computing)DebuggerSoftwareEmbedded system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In software debugging, trace generation techniques are used to resolve highly complex bugs. However, the emulators increasingly used for embedded software development do not yet offer the types of trace generation infrastructure available in hardware. In this article, we make changes to the ARM ISA emulation of the QEMU emulator to allow for continuous instruction-level trace generation. Using a standard GDB client, tracepoints can be inserted to dynamically log registers and memory addresses without altering executing code. The ability to run trace experiments in five different modes allows the scope of trace generation to be narrowed as needed, down to the level of a single Linux process. Our scheme collects the execution traces of a Linux process on average between 9.6x--0.7x the speed of existing QEMU trace capabilities, with 96.7% less trace data volume. Compared to a software-instrumented tracing scheme, our method is both unobtrusive and performs on average between 3--4 orders of magnitude faster.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.833
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.246 · 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