Lfm2000 - Fifth NASA Langley Formal Methods Workshop
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
This paper introduces the use of abstraction relationships for timed automata. Abstraction relations make it possible to determine when one specification implements another, i.e. when they have the same set of computations. The approach taken herepermits the hiding of internal events and takes into account the timedbehavior of the specification. A new representation of the semantics of a specification is introduced. This representation, min-max automata is morecompact than other types of finite state automata typically usedtorepresent real-time systems, and can beused to define a variety of abstraction relationships. 1 Introduction This paper describes the use of min-max automata to specify the behavior of real-time systems compactly. Originally developed [2] as an alternative representation of timed behavior for the Modechart language[12], in order to support the evaluation of abstraction relationships between Modechart specifications, min-max automata are a general construct for re...
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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