Temporal Specifications of Component Based Systems with Polymorphic Dynamic Reconfiguration
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
In this chapter, we present a formal characterisation of component based systems with support for polymorphic dynamic reconfiguration. By dynamic reconfiguration we mean, as usual, changes in the system architecture at run time. By polymorphic reconfiguration we mean that reconfiguration operations may concern different types of components or connections, exploiting an inheritance relationship over components, as in object orientation. The formal characterisation of component based systems is based on a firstorder temporal logic. The logic is a variant of the Manna-Pnueli logic, expressive enough for straightforward specification of component types, connector types and dynamic amalgamations of components. On top of this logic, and in the form of a (rather low level) specification language, we build the necessary machinery for specifying components, connectors and amalgamations, together with inheritance and polymorphism. When the complexity of software systems started to increase some decades ago, in
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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