Formal description of the ADT-model of B-trees
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
Formal specification of abstract data types (ADTs) is important in modeling system architecture and their implementations. B-Trees are one of the most widely used ADT in system development. This paper presents a formal approach to the specification of B-Tree using real-time process algebra (RTPA), which is a newly developed mathematics-based notation system for the specification and refinement of real-time and safety-critical systems. The logical model of B-Tree has been abstracted first. The RTPA specification of B-Tree is based on the logical model. In the RTPA specification, B-Tree has been formally described in three parts: system architecture, static behaviors, and dynamic behaviors. In the architectural specification, both logical model and physical implementation model of B-Tree has been specified. The logical model of B-Tree uses RTPA component logical models to present the structure of a B-Tree by nodes and characteristics; while the physical implementation model of B-Tree uses linked list to describe the implementation of a B-Tree. In the behavioral specification, three kinds of B-Tree behaviors, namely traversal operations, manipulation operations, and query operations, have been abstracted and specified by RTPA processes. This work is a part of the effort to build an ADT library for RTPA in the RTPA-based code generation project.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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