MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Domain Specific Language for the ARINC 653 Specification

2022· article· en· W4312932315 on OpenAlexaff
Ikram Darif, Cristiano Politowski, Ghizlane El Boussaidi, Sègla Kpodjedo

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicModel-Driven Software Engineering Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAvionicsComputer scienceMetamodelingIntegrated modular avionicsSoftware engineeringCertificationOperating systemEmbedded systemSoftwareEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the introduction of the integrated modular avionics (IMA), recent trends in avionics are to integrate dif-ferent software applications on the same hardware platform. In this context, the underlying platform embodied by a real-time operating system (RTOS) must be designed in compliance with the ARIN C 653 specification. ARIN C 653 defines an application executive (APEX) interface between the RTOS and avionics applications within IMA architecture. It specifies requirements of an environment that provides partitioning, i.e. separation of applications to ensure fault containment and ease of verification. Designing an RTOS that complies with ARIN C 653 is costly and requires significant efforts. In this paper, we introduce a domain-specific language (DSL) that supports the specification of an ARINC653-compliant RTOS. In particular, we consider ARINC 653 as a set of generic and high-level requirements, and we use model-driven technologies to specify these requirements in the form of a metamodel. The ARINC metamodel aims at supporting and reducing the cost of certification by reusing the metamodel across multiple RTOS development projects. Other benefits of the ARIN C metamodel include generating data required for certification such as ARIN C configuration tables and test data.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.008

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicModel-Driven Software Engineering TechniquesFrench-language works237,207