MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4255527491 · doi:10.1109/csmr.1999.756687

Extracting Java library subsets for deployment on embedded systems

2003· article· en· W4255527491 on OpenAlexaff
Derek Rayside, Kostas Kontogiannis

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReal-Time Systems Scheduling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceJavaVendorReal time JavaSoftware deploymentOperating systemJava annotationstrictfpEmbedded systemProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Embedded systems provide means for enhancing the functionality delivered by small-sized electronic devices such as hand-held computers and cellular phones. Java is a programming language which incorporates a number of features that are useful for developing such embedded systems. However the size and the complexity of the Java language and its libraries have slowed its adoption for embedded systems, due to the processing power and storage space limitations found in these systems. A common approach to address storage space limitations is for the vendor to offer special versions of the libraries with reduced functionality and size to meet the constraints of embedded systems. This paper presents a technique that is used for dynamically selecting, on an as needed basis, the subset of library entities that is exactly required for a given Java application to run. This subset can then be down-loaded to the device for execution. The advantage of this approach is that the developer can use arbitrary libraries, instead of being restricted to those which have been adapted for embedded systems by the vendors. A prototype system, that dynamically builds library subsets on an as needed per application basis, has been built and tested on several mid-size Java applications with positive results.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.004

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReal-Time Systems SchedulingFrench-language works237,207