MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293243668 · doi:10.1109/tcad.2022.3197693

Online Reset for Signal Temporal Logic Monitoring

2022· article· en· W4293243668 on OpenAlexaff
Zhenya Zhang, Paolo Arcaini, Xuan Xie

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFormal Methods in Verification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersJapan Science and Technology AgencyJapan Society for the Promotion of Science
KeywordsReset (finance)Computer scienceSIGNAL (programming language)Semantics (computer science)Real-time computingOverhead (engineering)Temporal logicPoint (geometry)Programming languageMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Online monitoring is a popular validation approach in which the temporal behavior of a system is checked to assess whether it satisfies a given specification expressed, e.g., in signal temporal logic (STL). This is done by employing a monitor that, at each time point, states the specification validity: satisfied, violated, or unknown. In some settings, monitoring should continue even after a violation episode is detected, to detect possible future violation episodes. However, for a monitor just relying on STL semantics, this is not possible, as, once the specification is violated by an input signal, any continuation of the signal still violates the specification. To tackle this problem, we here propose an optimal reset technique that, at runtime, detects the end of a violation episode and shifts the evaluation of the monitor to skip such an episode. In this way, the monitoring can continue to detect possible other future violation episodes. We propose a framework that integrates the reset technique with an existing monitoring approach. Experiments on two Simulink models show that the technique can effectively reset the monitor and report all the violation episodes, with a negligible overhead on the monitoring cost.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and SystemsSame topicFormal Methods in VerificationFrench-language works237,207