MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114812851 · doi:10.1109/ecrts.2013.30

Outstanding Paper Award: Using Max-Plus Algebra to Improve the Analysis of Non-cyclic Task Models

2013· article· en· W2114812851 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
TopicReal-Time Systems Scheduling
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeverage (statistics)Computer scienceTask (project management)GraphVertex (graph theory)Scheduling (production processes)Task analysisTheoretical computer scienceAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceMathematical optimizationMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several models have been proposed to represent conditional executions and dependencies among real-time concurrent tasks for the purpose of schedulability analysis. Among them, task graphs with cyclic recurrent behavior, i.e., those modeled with a single source vertex and a period parameter specifying the minimum amount of time that must elapse between successive activations of the source job, allow for efficient schedulability analysis based on the periodicity of the request and demand bound functions (em rbf and dbf). We leverage results from max-plus algebra to identify a recurrent term in rbf and dbf of general task graph models, even when the execution is neither recurrent nor controlled by a period parameter. As such, the asymptotic complexity of calculating rbf and dbf is independent from the length of the time interval. Experimental results demonstrate significant improvements on the runtime for system schedulability analysis.

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 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.658
Threshold uncertainty score0.882

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReal-Time Systems SchedulingFrench-language works237,207