MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2271357535 · doi:10.4108/eai.24-8-2015.2261152

Using Finite Forkable DEVS for Decision-Making Based on Time Measured with Uncertainty

2015· preprint· en· W2271357535 on OpenAlexaff
Damián Vicino, Olivier Dalle, Gabriel Wainer

Bibliographic record

VenueEAI Endorsed Transactions on Industrial Networks and Intelligent Systems · 2015
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicSimulation Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsDEVSComputer scienceDiscrete event simulationSequence (biology)Event (particle physics)AlgorithmLine (geometry)Real-time computingTheoretical computer scienceData miningSimulationMathematicsModeling and simulationPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The time-line in Discrete Event Simulation (DES) is a sequence of events defined in a numerable subset of R+. When it comes from an experimental measurement, the timing of these events has a limited precision. This precision is usually well-known and documented for each instruments and procedures used for collecting experimental datas. Therefore, these instruments and procedures produce measurement results expressed using values each associated with an uncertainty quantification, given by uncertainty intervals. Tools have been developed in Continuous Systems modeling for deriving the uncertainty intervals of the final results corresponding to the propagation of the uncertainty intervals being evaluated. These tools cannot be used in DES as they are defined, and no alternative tools that would apply to DES have been developed yet. In this paper, we propose simulation algorithms, based on the Discrete Event System Specification (DEVS) formalism, that can be used to simulate and obtain every possible output and state trajectories of simulations that receive input values with uncertainty quantification. Then, we present a subclass of DEVS models, called Finite Forkable DEVS (FF-DEVS), that can be simulated by the proposed algorithms. This subclass ensures that the simulation is forking only a finite number of processes for each simulation step. Finally, we discuss the simulation of a traffic light model and show the trajectories obtained when it is subject to input uncertainty.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.258
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.136 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEAI Endorsed Transactions on Industrial Networks and Intelligent SystemsSame topicSimulation Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207