Business Models for Distributed-Simulation Orchestration and Risk Management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nowadays, industries are implementing heterogeneous systems from different domains, backgrounds, and operating systems. Manufacturing systems are becoming more and more complex, which forces engineers to manage the complexity in several aspects. Technical complexities bring interoperability, risk management, and hazards issues that must be taken into consideration, from the business model design to the technical implementation. To solve the complexities and the incompatibilities between heterogeneous components, several distributed and cosimulation standards and tools can be used for data exchange and interconnection. High-level architecture (HLA) and functional mockup interface (FMI) are the main international standards used for distributed and cosimulation. HLA is mainly used in academic and defense domains while FMI is mostly used in industry. In this article, we propose an HLA/FMI implementation with a connection to an external business process-modeling tool called Papyrus. Papyrus is configured as a master federate that orchestrates the subsimulations based on the above standards. The developed framework is integrated with external heterogeneous components through an FMI interface. This framework is developed with the aim of bringing interoperability to a system used in a power generation company.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".