MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2954358149 · doi:10.5381/jot.2019.18.2.a15

A Model-driven Approach to Trace Checking of Temporal Properties with Aggregations.

2019· article· en· W2954358149 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Chaima Boufaied, Domenico Bianculli, Lionel Briand

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Object Technology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFormal Methods in Verification
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaEuropean CommissionUniversité du Luxembourg
KeywordsTRACE (psycholinguistics)Computer scienceModel checkingProgramming languageLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Signal-based temporal properties (SBTPs) characterize the behavior of a system when its inputs and outputs are signals over time; they are very common for the requirements specification of cyberphysical systems.Although there exist several specification languages for expressing SBTPs, such languages either do not easily allow the specification of important types of properties (such as spike or oscillatory behaviors), or are not supported by (efficient) trace-checking procedures.In this paper, we propose SB-TemPsy, a novel model-driven trace-checking approach for SBTPs.SB-TemPsy provides (i) SB-TemPsy-DSL, a domain-specific language that allows the specification of SBTPs covering the most frequent requirement types in cyber-physical systems, and (ii) SB-TemPsy-Check, an efficient, model-driven trace-checking procedure.This procedure reduces the problem of checking an SB-TemPsy-DSL property over an execution trace to the problem of evaluating an Object Constraint Language constraint on a model of the execution trace.We evaluated our contributions by assessing the expressiveness of SB-TemPsy-DSL and the applicability of SB-TemPsy-Check using a representative industrial case study in the satellite domain.SB-TemPsy-DSL could express 97% of the requirements of our case study and SB-TemPsy-Check yielded a trace-checking verdict in 87% of the cases, with an average checking time of 48.7 s.From a practical standpoint and compared to state-of-the-art alternatives, our approach strikes a better trade-off between expressiveness and performance as it supports a large set of property types that can be checked, in most cases, within practical time limits.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0010.004
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Object TechnologySame topicFormal Methods in VerificationFrench-language works237,207