MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126602474 · doi:10.1007/bf03192393

On synthesizing test cases in symbolic real-time testing

2006· article· en· W2126602474 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

VenueJournal of the Brazilian Computer Society · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFormal Methods in Verification
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTest (biology)Symbolic executionFormal specificationTest caseProgramming languageAlgorithmSoftware

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Test synthesis (or test generation) can be described as follows: from a formal specification of an implementation under test ( IUT ), and from a test purpose describing behaviors to be tested, the aim is to synthesize test cases to be executed in order to check whether the IUT conforms to its formal specification, while trying to control the IUT so that it satisfies the test purpose. In this paper, we study the synthesis of test cases for symbolic real-time systems. By symbolic, we mean that the specification of the IUT contains variables and parameters. And by realtime, we mean that the specification of the IUT contains timing constraints. Our method combines and generalizes two testing methods presented in previous work, namely: 1) a method for synthesizing test cases for (non-symbolic) real-time systems, and 2) a method for synthesizing test cases for (non-real-time) symbolic systems.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.585
Threshold uncertainty score0.484

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.238 · 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