MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122317343 · doi:10.1109/issre.1996.558835

A practical strategy for testing pair-wise coverage of network interfaces

2002· article· en· W2122317343 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVLSI and Analog Circuit Testing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersInstituto de TelecomunicaçõesUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsComputer scienceSet (abstract data type)Network elementTest (biology)Distributed computingData miningAlgorithmComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Distributed systems consist of a number of network elements that interact with each other. As the number of network elements and interchangeable components for each network element increases, the trade-off that the system tester faces is the thoroughness of test configuration coverage vs. limited resources of time and expense that are available. An approach to resolving this trade-off is to determine a set of test configurations that test each pair-wise combination of network components. This goal gives a well-defined level of test coverage, with a reduced number of system configurations. To select such a set of test configurations, we show how to apply the method of orthogonal Latin squares, from the design of balanced statistical experiments. Since the theoretical treatment assumes constraints that may not be satisfied in practice, we then show how to adapt this approach to realistic application constraints.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.314

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 head0.155
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.155 · 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

Citations159
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVLSI and Analog Circuit TestingFrench-language works237,207