MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3184919107 · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-81685-8_29

Effective Hybrid System Falsification Using Monte Carlo Tree Search Guided by QB-Robustness

2021· book-chapter· en· W3184919107 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueLecture notes in computer science · 2021
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFormal Methods in Verification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersJST-Mirai ProgramExploratory Research for Advanced TechnologyJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsRobustness (evolution)Computer scienceTree traversalScalabilityComputationTheoretical computer scienceMathematical optimizationAlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Hybrid system falsification is an important quality assurance method for cyber-physical systems with the advantage of scalability and feasibility in practice than exhaustive verification. Falsification, given a desired temporal specification, tries to find an input of violation instead of a proof guarantee. The state-of-the-art falsification approaches often employ stochastic hill-climbing optimization that minimizes the degree of satisfaction of the temporal specification, given by its quantitative robust semantics . However, it has been shown that the performance of falsification could be severely affected by the so-called scale problem , related to the different scales of the signals used in the specification (e.g., rpm and speed): in the robustness computation, the contribution of a signal could be masked by another one. In this paper, we propose a novel approach to tackle this problem. We first introduce a new robustness definition, called QB-Robustness , which combines classical Boolean satisfaction and quantitative robustness. We prove that QB-Robustness can be used to judge the satisfaction of the specification and avoid the scale problem in its computation. QB-Robustness is exploited by a falsification approach based on Monte Carlo Tree Search over the structure of the formal specification. First, tree traversal identifies the sub-formulas for which it is needed to compute the quantitative robustness. Then, on the leaves, numerical hill-climbing optimization is performed, aiming to falsify such sub-formulas. Our in-depth evaluation on multiple benchmarks demonstrates that our approach achieves better falsification results than the state-of-the-art falsification approaches guided by the classical quantitative robustness, and it is largely not affected by the scale problem.

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.

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Methods
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Simulation or modelinghigh
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Methods
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Simulation or modelinghigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.655
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.259 · 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