A framework for software architecture verification
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
The authors present a framework for analyzing software architecture descriptions using machine-assisted formal proof. Our approach is based on the translation of an existing architecture description language (ADL) based specification to an alternate mathematical representation. We use higher order logic as mechanized by the Prototype Verification System (PVS) as the formal basis of our framework. Our approach is not tied to any particular ADL. Rather, we define an ADL-independent model of architecture description which formalizes the fundamental design concepts of architecture modeling notations. A key feature of our framework is its flexibility; the architect can choose the design concepts that are modeled. Moreover, since the model is generic to many ADLs, our approach allows for the analysis of systems that are specified using more than one notation. We introduce our model of architecture description, and illustrate the utility of our approach by verifying internal properties of an example architecture, a simple compiler specified in a pipe-and-filter architectural style.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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