MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139856826 · doi:10.5555/1161734.1161786

Computer automated multi-paradigm modelling for analysis and design of traffic networks

2004· article· en· W2139856826 on OpenAlexaff
Hans Vangheluwe, Juan de Lara

Bibliographic record

VenueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicModel-Driven Software Engineering Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetri netComputer scienceFormalism (music)Programming languageTheoretical computer scienceGraph rewritingAbstract syntaxVisual modelingGraphSyntaxDistributed computingUnified Modeling LanguageSemantics (computer science)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, Computer Automated Multi-Paradigm Modelling (CAMPaM) is presented as an enabler for domain-specific analysis and design of complex systems. Traffic, a new visual formalism tailored to the domain of vehicle traffic networks, is introduced. In the CAMPaM approach, the syntax of Traffic models is meta-modelled in an appropriate formalism such as Entity-Relationship Diagrams. From this description of abstract syntax, augmented with concrete (visual) syntax information, an interactive, visual modelling environment is automatically generated. The semantics of the Traffic formalism is subsequently modelled by mapping Traffic models onto Petri Net models. As the abstract syntax of models, irrespective of the formalism they are described in, is graph-like, graph rewriting can be used to transform models. Graph Grammar models thus allow for the specification of model transformations. The meta-modelling and transforma-tion of the Traffic formalism uses our CAMPaM tool AToM A Tool for Multi-formalism and Meta-Modelling. The advantages of creating a domain-specific formalism such as Traffic as opposed to using a generic formalism such as Petri Nets are presented. We also demonstrate how mapping Trafc models onto Petri Net models allows one to employ the vast array of Petri Net analysis techniques. In particular, a Coverability Graph is automatically generated and conservation analysis is automated by transforming this graph into an integer linear programming specification which is subsequently solved by the lp_solve code.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations8
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas)Same topicModel-Driven Software Engineering TechniquesFrench-language works237,207