MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2741763455 · doi:10.1109/sies.2017.7993373

Static probabilistic timing analysis with a permanent fault detection mechanism

2017· article· en· W2741763455 on OpenAlexaff
Chao Chen, Jacopo Panerati, Imane Hafnaoui, Giovanni Beltrame

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReal-Time Systems Scheduling
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProbabilistic logicCacheComputer scienceFault detection and isolationFault (geology)Mechanism (biology)Parallel computingEmbedded systemReal-time computingArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, random caches have been proposed as a way to simplify the timing analysis of real-time systems. However, technology-scaling makes caches prone to faults. Fault detection mechanisms can detect permanent faults but they affect the timing analysis of a random cache. This paper introduces a Static Probabilistic Timing Analysis (SPTA) technique that accounts for a permanent fault detection mechanism. The permanent fault detection mechanism periodically checks caches for faults and disables faulty cache blocks to prevent future accesses. The SPTA method operates by periodically switching its runtime between the fault-detection and the no-fault-detection states. This is the first SPTA with a realistic permanent fault detection mechanism. Experiments show that the proposed method always provides safe timing estimations-even when few memory blocks are provided-and accurate results-when sufficient memory blocks are present.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReal-Time Systems SchedulingFrench-language works237,207