MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2955338589 · doi:10.22215/etd/2018-13266

FSM Testing Based on Transition Trees and Complete Round Trip Paths Testing Criteria

2018· dissertation· en· W2955338589 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

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Testing and Debugging Techniques
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTree traversalRandom testingTest suiteAlgorithmTree (set theory)Computer scienceFinite-state machineTest caseFault tree analysisMathematicsEngineeringMachine learningCombinatoricsReliability engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

State machine testing has received genuine attention in the literature. Among the studied testing strategies are complete round-trip paths and transition trees that cover round-trip paths in a piecewise manner. Although trees are claimed to be equivalent to complete round-trip paths testing, there is anecdotal evidence that this is not the case. The core contribution of this thesis is therefore an empirical comparison between the effectiveness of the complete round-trip paths test suites and the transition trees test suites on the one hand and the effectiveness of the different techniques used to generate transition trees (breadth first traversal, depth first traversal, and random traversal) on the other hand.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.947
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.237 · 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