MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2576160198 · doi:10.1109/quatic.2016.021

A Fully Automated Approach to Discovering Nondeterminism in State Machine Diagrams

2016· article· en· W2576160198 on OpenAlexaff
Opeyemi Adesina, Timothy C. Lethbridge, Stéphane S. Somé

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Reliability and Analysis Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceLeverage (statistics)Model checkingAbstract state machinesState (computer science)Set (abstract data type)False positive paradoxProgramming languageFinite-state machineTheoretical computer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a fully automated technique to detect nondeterminism in state diagrams. Although nondeterminism is a tool often adopted by requirement engineers for specification of a system under development (SUD), it is normally undesirable in actual implementation. Discovering nondeterminism manually is infeasible for industrial-sized systems. Solutions in the literature lack the capability to analyze infinite-state systems. We leverage the nuXmv model checker to analyze unbounded domains and implement an algorithm that systematically computes a minimal set of comparable transitions for the SUD yet eliminates false positives by model checking. To validate our approach, we analyze a real-world system and report discovered cases of nondeterminism. We employ Umple's capability to convert state machines to nuXmv.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.256 · 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
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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware Reliability and Analysis ResearchFrench-language works237,207