Probabilistic Safe WCET Estimation for Weakly Hard Real-Time Systems at Design Stages
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Weakly hard real-time systems can, to some degree, tolerate deadline misses, but their schedulability still needs to be analyzed to ensure their quality of service. Such analysis usually occurs at early design stages to provide implementation guidelines to engineers so that they can make better design decisions. Estimating worst-case execution times (WCET) is a key input to schedulability analysis. However, early on during system design, estimating WCET values is challenging and engineers usually determine them as plausible ranges based on their domain knowledge. Our approach aims at finding restricted, safe WCET sub-ranges given a set of ranges initially estimated by experts in the context of weakly hard real-time systems. To this end, we leverage (1) multi-objective search aiming at maximizing the violation of weakly hard constraints in order to find worst-case scheduling scenarios and (2) polynomial logistic regression to infer safe WCET ranges with a probabilistic interpretation. We evaluated our approach by applying it to an industrial system in the satellite domain and several realistic synthetic systems. The results indicate that our approach significantly outperforms a baseline relying on random search without learning, and estimates safe WCET ranges with a high degree of confidence in practical time (< 23h).
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it