MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151867707 · doi:10.5555/2433508.2433598

Managing simulation workflow patterns using dynamic service-oriented compositions

2010· article· en· W2151867707 on OpenAlexaff
Khaldoon Al‐Zoubi, Gabriel Wainer

Bibliographic record

VenueWinter Simulation Conference · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBusiness Process Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkflowWorkflow technologyComputer scienceWorkflow engineWorkflow management systemInteroperabilityMiddleware (distributed applications)Windows Workflow FoundationSoftware engineeringWeb serviceComponent (thermodynamics)Workflow Management CoalitionBusiness processBusiness process managementServerXPDLDatabaseWorld Wide WebEngineeringWork in process

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Distributed simulation usage in industry has been limited due to its high cost in comparison to its returned benefits. A number of surveys of experts from different background suggested the need of distributed simulation features to overcome its challenges and cost. The RESTful Interoperability Simulation Environment (RISE) middleware, based on RESTful Web-services, deals with these issues. However, simulation assets also need to be part of a formal Business Process Management (BPM) to allow practical across-enterprise collaboration. The Workflow mechanism introduced here promises to help with this situation. Further, these workflows provide automation, repeatable and reusable simulation experiments. We present the design of a workflow component that is capable of managing and executing different workflow patterns across various simulation RISE servers. We further present in detail a number of simulation workflow patterns executed by the workflow component.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations5
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWinter Simulation ConferenceSame topicBusiness Process Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207