MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3180751300 · doi:10.1145/1543136.1542471

Tracing interrupts in embedded software

2009· article· en· W3180751300 on OpenAlexaff
Giovani Gracioli, Sebastian Fischmeister

Bibliographic record

VenueACM SIGPLAN Notices · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed systems and fault tolerance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDebuggingComputer scienceTracingInterruptControl flowSoftwareAlgorithmic program debuggingEmbedded softwareBackground debug mode interfaceEmbedded systemHeuristicProgramming languageDistributed computingOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the system development, developers often must correct wrong behavior in the software---an activity colloquially called program debugging. Debugging is a complex activity, especially in real-time embedded systems because such systems interact with the physical world and make heavy use of interrupts for timing and driving I/O devices. Debugging interrupts is difficult, because they cause non-linear control flow in programs which is hard to reproduce in software. Record/replay mechanisms have proven their use to debugging embedded systems, because they provide means to recreate control flows offline where they can be debugged. In this work, we present the data tracing part of the record/replay mechanism that is specifically targeted to record interrupt behavior. To tune our tracing mechanism, we use the observed principle of return address clustering and a formal model for quantitative reasoning about the tracing mechanism. The presented heuristic and mechanisms show surprisingly good results---up to an 800 percent speedup on the selector function and a 300 percent reduction on duplicates for non-optimal selector functions---considering the leanness of the approach.

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)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM SIGPLAN NoticesSame topicDistributed systems and fault toleranceFrench-language works237,207