MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963063504 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.0907.3123

Verification of Timed Automata Using Rewrite Rules and Strategies

2009· article· en· W2963063504 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

VenueArXiv.org · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFormal Methods in Verification
Canadian institutionsPrevention of Organ Failure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRewritingComputer scienceAutomatonModel checkingProgramming languageTheoretical computer scienceGraphConstraint (computer-aided design)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ELAN is a powerful language and environment for specifying and prototyping deduction systems in a language based on rewrite rules controlled by strategies. Timed automata is a class of continuous real-time models of reactive systems for which efficient model-checking algorithms have been devised. In this paper, we show that these algorithms can very easily be prototyped in the ELAN system. This paper argues through this example that rewriting based systems relying on rules and strategies are a good framework to prototype, study and test rather efficiently symbolic model-checking algorithms, i.e. algorithms which involve combination of graph exploration rules, deduction rules, constraint solving techniques and decision procedures.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.803
Threshold uncertainty score0.329

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.256 · 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