Specification and Verification of Communication Paradigms for CBSE in Event B
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
The development of distributed computing systems and of their usage in domains such as the Internet of Things, Big Data, etc., raises numerous questions on the tools available to model the complexity of such systems. Non-formal modeling methods fail to create a rigorous way to describe and analyze these systems. In this paper, we propose an approach to model and analyze the structural and behavioural aspect of these systems using formal techniques. As a prerequisite, we build reusable model libraries to specify and verify communication paradigms for modeling software architectures of distributed systems in a component-based system engineering (CBSE) context. First, we describe high-level concepts for system architecture in a component-port-connector fashion as a metamodel. Then, we develop an Event-B interpretation of the metamodel adding communication characteristics such as buffering, FIFO and synchronicity. To validate our work, we studied the two well-known communication paradigms, namely message passing and remote procedure call.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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