MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3175593498 · doi:10.4018/jssci.2011100106

The Formal Design Models of Tree Architectures and Behaviors

2011· article· en· W3175593498 on OpenAlexaff
Yingxu Wang, Xinming Tan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Software Science and Computational Intelligence · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Computing and Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTree traversalTree (set theory)Binary treeNode (physics)Process (computing)Set (abstract data type)ArchitectureTheoretical computer scienceProgramming languageMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Trees are one of the most fundamental and widely used non-linear hierarchical structures of linked nodes. A binary tree (B-Tree) is a typical balanced tree where the fan-out of each node is at most two known as the left and right children. This paper develops a comprehensive design pattern of formal trees using the B-Tree architecture. A rigorous denotational mathematics, Real-Time Process Algebra (RTPA), is adopted, which allows both architectural and behavioral models of B-Trees to be rigorously designed and implemented in a top-down approach. The architectural models of B-Trees are created using RTPA architectural modeling methodologies known as the Unified Data Models (UDMs). The physical model of B-Trees is implemented using the left and right child nodes dynamically created in memory. The behavioral models of B-Trees are specified and refined by a set of Unified Process Models (UPMs) in three categories namely the management operations, traversal operations, and node I/O operations. This work has been applied in a number of real-time and nonreal-time system designs such as a real-time operating system (RTOS+), a general system organization model, and the ADT library for an RTPA-based automatic code generator.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations5
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Software Science and Computational IntelligenceSame topicCognitive Computing and NetworksFrench-language works237,207