MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089148440 · doi:10.1145/1022494.1022526

Modelling and verifying web service orchestration by means of the concurrency workbench

2004· article· en· W2089148440 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 SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicService-Oriented Architecture and Web Services
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityIBM (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceProgramming languageProcess calculusConcurrencyWeb serviceOrchestrationBusiness Process Execution LanguageWorkbenchSoftware engineeringService-oriented architectureVisualizationArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Verification techniques like model checking, preorder checking and equivalence checking are shown to be relevant to web service orchestration. The Concurrency Workbench of the New Century (CWB) is a verification tool that supports these verification techniques. By means of the Process Algebra Compiler (PAC), the CWB is modified to support the BPE-calculus. The BPE-calculus is a small language, based on BPEL4WS, to express web service orchestration. Both the syntax and the semantics of the BPE-calculus are formally defined. These are subsequently used as input for the PAC. As output, the PAC produces modules that are incorporated into the CWB so that it supports the BPE-calculus and, hence, provides a verification tool for web service orchestration.

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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.366
Threshold uncertainty score0.731

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.191 · 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