Bibliographic record
Abstract
This volume contains the Proceedings of the International Workshop Validation and Implementation of Scenario-based Specifications (VISS'2002) that was held as satellite event of the 5th European Joint Conferences on Theory and Practice of Software (ETAPS'2002) in Grenoble, France, April 7th, 2002. There is a strong need within systems engineering and software development to improve software design by applying general and flexible tools. Formal tools for describing systems are required for increasing the efficiency of the design process through automated error analysis, integration of specifications into existing tools, and automatical generation of intermediate descriptions. Graphical specification formalisms exhibit an increasing popularity in software development for industrial applications. The prototype of scenario-based, graphical languages is the ITU standardized notation of message sequence charts (MSC). Used for capturing early system requirements, MSCs are particularly suited for designing and validating distributed, reactive systems, in particular telecommunication protocols. The aim of the workshop is to gather a larger community of researchers interested in scenario-based notations for designing distributed systems and to outline new trends and problems in the field. The papers in this volume were reviewed by members of the programme committee: • Benoît Caillaud (IRISA, Rennes) co-chair • Kousha Etessami (Bell Labs, NJ) • Loïc Hélouët (FT R&D, Lannion) • Ferhat Khendek (Concordia, Montréal) • Ingolf Krüger (TUM, Munich) • Anca Muscholl (LIAFA, Paris) chair • Madhavan Mukund (Chennai Math. Inst., Chennai) • Doron Peled (Bell Labs, NJ) • Daniel Vincent (FT R&D, Lannion) We are very grateful to Manfred Broy (TU Munich) and Doron Peled (Texas at Austin) for their enlightening surveys. We also acknowledge the very efficient organization provided by the ETAPS'2002 local committee, in particular the assistance of Susanne Graf. Thanks are also due to IRISA/INRIA at Rennes, France, which has supplied the financial support. May 15th, 2002 Benoît Caillaud and Anca Muscholl
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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.618 | 0.450 |
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".