MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404220704 · doi:10.1007/s10270-024-01216-7

Continuous Evolution of Digital Twins using the DarTwin Notation

2024· article· en· W4404220704 on OpenAlex
Joost Mertens, Stefan Klikovits, Francis Bordeleau, Joachim Denil, Øystein Haugen

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueSoftware & Systems Modeling · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDigital Transformation in Industry
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersFonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
KeywordsNotationComputer scienceMathematicsArithmetic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Despite best efforts, various challenges remain in the creation and maintenance processes of digital twins (DTs). One of those primary challenges is the constant, continuous and omnipresent evolution of systems, their user’s needs and their environment, demanding the adaptation of the developed DT systems. DTs are developed for a specific purpose, which generally entails the monitoring, analysis, simulation or optimisation of a specific aspect of an actual system , referred to as the actual twin (AT). As such, when the twin system changes, that is either the AT itself changes, or the scope/purpose of a DT is modified, the DTs usually evolve in close synchronicity with the AT. As DTs are software systems, the best practices or methodologies for software evolution can be leveraged. This paper tackles the challenge of maintaining a (set of) DT(s) throughout the evolution of the user’s requirements and priorities and tries to understand how this evolution takes place. In doing so, we provide two contributions: (i) we develop , a visual notation form that enables reasoning on a twin system, its purposes, properties and implementation, and (ii) we introduce a set of architectural transformations that describe the evolution of DT systems. The development of these transformations is driven and illustrated by the evolution and transformations of a family home’s DT, whose purpose is expanded, changed and re-prioritised throughout its ongoing lifecycle. Additionally, we evaluate the transformations on a laboratory-scale gantry crane’s DT.

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 score0.789
Threshold uncertainty score0.457

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.210 · 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