MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129299706 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2006.277330

Profiling of the Lab VIEW Development Environment and Real-Time Module

2006· article· en· W2129299706 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 institutionsNational Research Council CanadaCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceReal-time operating systemProfiling (computer programming)Embedded systemSoftwareOverhead (engineering)Real-time Control SystemReal-time computingControl (management)Operating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a model that was created to assist in determining if a given application can be scheduled such that all hard real-time deadlines are met. The model was used to profile programs generated by the LabVIEW development environment with the additional real-time module. Information on the overhead of the real-time operating system (RTOS) was gathered. Using this information, an application can be analyzed to determine if all threads would meet their deadlines. The analysis of the underlying assumptions that were made in the model would also be discussed. The model can play an important role in estimating the degree of determinism needed by real-time control software, particularly when the hardware is sensitive and most of the program is based on high-level tools such as LabVIEW. A robot joint control system has been taken as an example; however, the approach is generic and applicable to other applications

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.243
Threshold uncertainty score0.276

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.186 · 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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReal-Time Systems SchedulingFrench-language works237,207