MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225646930 · doi:10.3390/software1020007

Dependability Modeling of Software Systems with UML and DAM: A Guide for Real-Time Practitioners

2022· article· en· W4225646930 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueSoftware · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Reliability and Analysis Research
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersMinisterio de Ciencia e Innovación
KeywordsDependabilityUnified Modeling LanguageComputer scienceApplications of UMLSoftware engineeringSystems engineeringSoftwareReliability engineeringEngineeringProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The modeling of system non-functional properties is a broad field. Among these properties, dependability is an important one for real-time and embedded systems. On the other hand, UML offers the profiling mechanism to address specific modeling domains. In particular, the DAM (dependability analysis and modeling) profile provides a modeling framework for dependability in the model-driven paradigm. This work is for practitioners to understand the basics of dependability modeling, using DAM. In this sense, the paper digests the literature to understand the concept of the UML profile, the MARTE profile and to obtain a practical guide on dependability modeling using DAM. The modeling approach is illustrated through a case study taken from the literature.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.649
Threshold uncertainty score0.636

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.260 · 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