MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3018867236 · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-45234-6_22

Automated Generation of Consistent Graph Models with First-Order Logic Theorem Provers

2020· book-chapter· en· W3018867236 on OpenAlexafffund
Aren A. Babikian, Oszkár Semeráth, Dániel Varró

Bibliographic record

VenueLecture notes in computer science · 2020
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicModel-Driven Software Engineering Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceFirst-order logicAutomated theorem provingGraphProgramming languageTheoretical computer scienceAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The automated generation of graph models has become an enabler in several testing scenarios, including the testing of modeling environments used in the design of critical systems, or the synthesis of test contexts for autonomous vehicles. Those approaches rely on the automated construction of consistent graph models, where each model satisfies complex structural properties of the target domain captured in first-order logic predicates. In this paper, we propose a transformation technique to map such graph generation tasks to a problem consisting of first-order logic formulae, which can be solved by state-of-the-art TPTP-compliant theorem provers, producing valid graph models as outputs. We conducted performance measurements over all 73 theorem provers available in the TPTP library, and compared our approach with other solver-based approaches like Alloy and VIATRA Solver.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
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 score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLecture notes in computer scienceSame topicModel-Driven Software Engineering TechniquesFrench-language works237,207