MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2966316752 · doi:10.22215/etd/2014-10132

Automatic Derivation of Performance Models in the Context of Model-Driven SOA

2014· dissertation· en· W2966316752 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 System Performance and Reliability
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModel transformationUnified Modeling LanguageComputer scienceSoftware architectureFeature modelMetamodelingModel-driven architectureSoftware deploymentOASIS SOA Reference ModelSoftware engineeringSoftwareService-oriented architectureSystems engineeringEngineeringProgramming languageWeb serviceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The thesis proposes a model transformation chain called Performance from Unified Modeling Analysis for Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA) systems (PUMA4SOA), whose purpose is to automatically generate performance models from the UML software design models of SOA systems with performance annotations. The main goal of PUMA4SOA is to enable the analysis of performance properties of software systems in the early software development phases, which helps developing SOA systems that meet their performance requirements. PUMA4SOA extends PUMA, an existing transformation approach from software to performance models developed in our research group. The main differences between PUMA4SOA and PUMA are as follows: a) focus on SOA systems; b) application of Model-Driven Architecture (MDA) principles of considering first software platform-independent models (PIM) which are then transformed into platform-specific models (PSM); c) use of a Platform Completion (PC) feature model to define variability of platform characteristics; d) use of aspect-oriented modeling (AOM) techniques to specify realization of platform features; and e) systematic use of trace-links between different types of models (i.e., software, intermediate and performance models). PUMA4SOA accepts the following input models: the software platform independent model, the deployment model, the PC-feature models and a set of platform aspect models. Similar to PUMA, PUMA4SOA makes use of an intermediate model called Core Scenario Model (CSM). The model transformations chain of PUMA4SOA begins by transforming the UML PIM to a CSM PIM, which in turn is used to generate a CSM PSM using an AOM approach. The third model transformation maps the CSM platform specific model into a performance model (Layered Queuing Network in this case)

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.632
Threshold uncertainty score0.444

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.235 · 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