MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Statistical Model Checking based Analysis of Fault Trees and Power Consumption to Enhance Autonomous Systems Reliability

2023· article· en· W4385624965 on OpenAlexaff
Ashkan Samadi, Marwan Ammar, Otmane Aı̈t Mohamed

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Reliability and Analysis Research
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFault tree analysisReliability engineeringRedundancy (engineering)Computer sciencePower consumptionReliability (semiconductor)Component (thermodynamics)Model checkingProbability modelStatistical modelPower (physics)EngineeringArtificial intelligenceStatisticsMathematicsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a fault tree analysis (FTA) method is proposed that can not only evaluate the failure risk of autonomous systems but also their power consumption over time. The suggested technique relies on FTA and statistical model checking (SMC). After evaluating the probability of system failure and the power consumption of system components, the optimal risk mitigation techniques can be determined considering the duration of the mission. To demonstrate the methodology, the causes of mission failure in a typical drone are examined. After identifying the critical sources of mission failure, a number of risk mitigation techniques based on component redundancy are evaluated to investigate their potential to lower the probability of system failure.

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)0.006
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.314 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware Reliability and Analysis ResearchFrench-language works237,207