MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401990465 · doi:10.1109/dsn-s60304.2024.00030

Tutorial: LLTFI and the Art of Fault Injection

2024· article· en· W4401990465 on OpenAlexaff
Karthik Pattabiraman, Abraham Chan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRadiation Effects in Electronics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceFault injectionFault (geology)Programming languageGeologySoftwareSeismology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fault injection has been a well-researched area in the dependable and reliable systems community. Nevertheless, a simple framework for fault injection that combines both software and hardware errors in an adaptable way, has not previously existed before the debut of LLFI, an LLVM-based fault injector tool. We present a tutorial for LLTFI, an fault injector tool extending LLFI, which is capable of injecting faults into both machine learning and native code applications. Assuming some prior knowledge of fault injection, this tutorial covers the fundamentals, design philosophy, and application of LLTFI.

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 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.511
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRadiation Effects in ElectronicsFrench-language works237,207