MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

An Algebraic Approach for the Specification and the Verification of Aspect-Oriented Systems

2014· book-chapter· en· W2908880040 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

VenueAdvances in systems analysis, software engineering, and high performance computing book series · 2014
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Software Engineering Methodologies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAspect-oriented programmingComputer scienceModularity (biology)Modular designTraceabilityProgramming languageObject-oriented programmingFormal specificationFormal verificationAlgebraic specificationSoftware engineeringTheoretical computer scienceSoftware

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aspect-Oriented (AO) Technology is a post-object-oriented technology used to overcome limitations of Object-Oriented (OO) Technology, such as the cross-cutting concern problem. Aspect-Oriented Programming (AOP) also offers modularity and traceability benefits. Yet, reasoning, specification, and verification of AO systems present unique challenges, especially as such systems evolve over time. Consequently, formal modular reasoning of such systems is highly attractive as it enables tractable evolution, otherwise necessitating that the entire system be re-examined each time a component is changed or is added. The aspect interactions problem is also an open issue in the AOP area. To deal with this problem, the authors choose to use Category Theory (CT) and Algebraic Specification (AS) techniques. In this chapter, the authors present an aspect-oriented specification and verification approach. The approach is expressive and allows for formal modular reasoning.

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)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.529
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.228
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