Object-oriented real-time concurrency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The primary goal of a real-time system is predictability. Achieving this goal requires all levels of the system to work in concert to provide fixed worst-case execution-times. Un-fortunately, many real-time systems are overly restrictive, providing only ad-hoc scheduling facilities and basic concurrent functionality. Ad-hoc scheduling makes developing, verifying, and maintaining a real-time system extremely difficult and time consuming. Basic concurrent functionality forces programmers to develop complex concurrent programs without the aid of high-level concurrency features.Encouraging the use of sophisticated real-time theory and methodology, in conjunction with high-level concurrency features, requires flexibility and extensibility. Giving real-time programmers access to the underlying system data-structures makes it possible to interact with the system to incorporate new ideas and fine-tune specific applications. This paper explores this approach by examining its effect on a selection of crucial real-time issues: real-time monitors, timeouts, dynamic-priority scheduling and basic priority inheritance. The approach is implemented in μC++ .
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.006 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".