MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151629759 · doi:10.1109/sefm.2005.44

Stuttering abstraction for model checking

2005· article· en· W2151629759 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
TopicFormal Methods in Verification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbstractionComputer scienceAbstraction model checkingModel checkingSet (abstract data type)ScalabilityTheoretical computer scienceConstruct (python library)Operator (biology)Abstract interpretationProgramming languageDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstraction is one of the most effective approaches to improving the applicability and the scalability of model-checking. The goal of abstraction is to construct a model which is small enough to analyze, yet contains enough detail to allow conclusive analysis of properties of interest. For a given concrete model, the size of its smallest possible abstraction is intimately related to the set of temporal properties preserved by the abstraction. Thus, smaller abstractions are possible if we reduce this set, for example, by disallowing the use of the next-time operator. In this paper, we improve the conclusiveness and efficiency of the 3-valued abstraction framework. We start by proposing a number of simulation relations that preserve true properties expressed in subsets of CTL without the next-time operator. We show how these simulation relations are extended into refinement relations for defining 3-valued abstractions. Using these refinement relations, we give a new abstraction method that results in more conclusive abstract models.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.878
Threshold uncertainty score0.168

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations12
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFormal Methods in VerificationFrench-language works237,207