MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Lessons Learned Building a Tool for Workflow<sup>+</sup>

2023· article· en· W4389630139 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSafety Systems Engineering in Autonomy
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsWorkflowOriginal equipment manufacturerAutomotive industryEclipseComputer scienceSoftware engineeringSystems engineeringSafety assuranceManufacturing engineeringEngineeringProcess managementDatabaseReliability engineeringOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As automotive manufacturers continue to release more advanced autonomous features, the effort required to ensure safety is increasing. This is a result of the growing complexity of automotive systems, and the increased level of safety assurance required for higher levels of autonomy. The Workflow+ model-based framework was developed in response to these challenges, to provide a way for safety assurance to be developed rigorously and with automated tool support. In this paper we discuss our experiences and lessons learned while developing Eclipse-based tooling for Workflow+ during a collaborative research project with a large automotive OEM.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.849
Threshold uncertainty score0.936

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSafety Systems Engineering in AutonomyFrench-language works237,207