Uncertainty on Discrete-Event System Simulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Uncertainty Propagation methods are well-established when used in modeling and simulation formalisms like differential equations. Nevertheless, until now there are no methods for Discrete-Dynamic Systems. Uncertainty-Aware Discrete-Event System Specification (UA-DEVS) is a formalism for modeling Discrete-Event Dynamic Systems that include uncertainty quantification in messages, states, and event times. UA-DEVS models provide a theoretical framework to describe the models’ uncertainty and their properties. As UA-DEVS models can include continuous variables and non-computable functions, their simulation could be non-computable. For this reason, we also introduce Interval-Approximated Discrete-Event System Specification (IA-DEVS), a formalism that approximates UA-DEVS models using a set of order and bounding functions to obtain a computable model. The computable model approximation produces a tree of all trajectories that can be traversed from the original model and some erroneous ones introduced by the approximation process. We also introduce abstract simulation algorithms for IA-DEVS, present a case study of UA-DEVS, its IA-DEVS approximation and, its simulation results using the algorithms defined.
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 | 0.005 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".