MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099480557 · doi:10.1109/ecbs.2009.25

On the Meaning of SysML Activity Diagrams

2009· article· en· W2099480557 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
KeywordsSystems Modeling LanguageComputer scienceActivity diagramSemantics (computer science)Programming languageOperational semanticsProbabilistic logicMeaning (existential)Theoretical computer scienceUnified Modeling LanguageSoftware engineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we aim to ascribe a meaning to SysML activity diagrams. To this end, we propose a dedicated algebraic-like language, namely activity calculus, and an operational semantics that provides a rigorous and intuitive operational understanding of the behavior captured by the diagram. The semantics covers advanced control flows such as unstructured loops and concurrent control flows. Further more, our approach allows non well-formed control flows, with mixed and nested forks and joins. The probabilistic behaviors as specified in SysML are also considered. This formalization allows us to build a sound framework for the verification and validation of systems design expressed in SysML activity diagrams.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.639
Threshold uncertainty score0.144

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.240 · 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