MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2996404697 · doi:10.1109/rew.2019.00014

Non-Deterministic Use Case Map Traversal Algorithm for Scenario Simulation and Debugging

2019· article· en· W2996404697 on OpenAlexaff
Gabriel Negash, Chun Ming Liang, Feras Al Taha, Nadin Bou Khzam, Gunter Mussbacher

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicModel-Driven Software Engineering Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTree traversalDebuggingComputer scienceNotationVisualizationKey (lock)Programming languageDistributed computingData miningOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The User Requirements Notation (URN) is a Requirements Engineering modeling language published by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) to formally specify and analyze what a user would expect from a system. In particular, URN allows the modeling of use cases and scenarios of a system with Use Case Maps (UCM). A key benefit of formalizing these models is the added ability to better analyze them; thus gaining insight to improve quality and understanding of the requirements of the system and its capabilities. Existing traversal mechanisms which analyze UCM do not well reflect the inherent stochasticity of system or user interactions, because they are typically designed for visualization purposes rather than simulation and debugging. We propose a novel traversal mechanism that (i) better reflects real systems by incorporating non-determinism, (ii) considers multiple independent scenarios running concurrently, (iii) implements the UCM concept of map instances, and (iv) consequently enables automated simulation and execution as well as user-driven forward and backward debugging of UCM. We validate the novel traversal mechanism by applying it to a crisis response mobile app that allows a first responder to step forwards and backwards through crisis response actions.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.939
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicModel-Driven Software Engineering TechniquesFrench-language works237,207