MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2800971793 · doi:10.1145/3105748

Engineering Self-Adaptive Software Systems

2018· article· en· W2800971793 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Autonomous and Adaptive Systems · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Software Engineering Methodologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceAdaptation (eye)Scheduling (production processes)ExploitController (irrigation)SoftwareDistributed computingMathematical optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Self-adaptive software systems monitor their operation and adapt when their requirements fail due to unexpected phenomena in their environment. This article examines the case where the environment changes dynamically over time and the chosen adaptation has to take into account such changes. In control theory, this type of adaptation is known as Model Predictive Control and comes with a well-developed theory and myriad successful applications. The article focuses on modeling the dynamic relationship between requirements and possible adaptations. It then proposes a controller that exploits this relationship to optimize the satisfaction of requirements relative to a cost function. This is accomplished through a model-based framework for designing self-adaptive software systems that can guarantee a certain level of requirements satisfaction over time by dynamically composing adaptation strategies when necessary. The proposed framework is illustrated and evaluated through two simulated systems, namely, the Meeting-Scheduling exemplar and an E-Shop.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.429
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.217 · 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