MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139438218 · doi:10.1109/reldi.2000.885395

An evolutionary algorithm for identifying faults in t-diagnosable systems

2002· article· en· W2139438218 on OpenAlexaff
Mourad Elhadef, B. Ayeb

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVLSI and Analog Circuit Testing
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceAlgorithmGenetic algorithmEvolutionary algorithmContext (archaeology)Set (abstract data type)Representation (politics)Fault (geology)Artificial intelligenceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper describes a novel approach to the problem of system-level fault diagnosis using genetic algorithms. Consider a system composed of n independent units, each of which tests a subset of the others. It is assumed that at most t of these units are permanently faulty. Such a system is said to be t-diagnosable if, given any complete collection of test results, the set of faulty units can be uniquely identified. Genetic algorithms have recently received much attention as a class of robust stochastic search algorithms for various optimization problems. An efficient method based on evolutionary algorithms is developed to solve the diagnosis problem. The representation of the search space used is in the form of a binary vector of length n. Each bit indicates the status (faulty or fault-free) of its corresponding unit. Genetic operators are adapted to the context of system-level diagnosis. The genetic algorithm was implemented and tested on random test graphs. The simulation results demonstrate the efficiency of the proposed diagnosis algorithm.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations26
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVLSI and Analog Circuit TestingFrench-language works237,207