MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6888557571 · doi:10.21227/v6kd-4n80

The Effects of Tool Selection on the WCET of SCADE Generated Software: Dataset

2019· dataset· en· W6888557571 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE DataPort · 2019
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAerospaceCompilerCode (set theory)Automotive industrySoftwareSelection (genetic algorithm)Code generationSource code

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dataset uses a newly introduced method for the analysis of the effects on WCET of the tools used in real-time systems. It is the result of a full factorial experiment comparing SCADE code generation tools (SCADE 5 and 6), compilers (Wind River, GCC, Code Warrior), optimization settings, and WCET analysis tools (high water mark measurement, Rapita RVS, Otawa, AbsInt aiT). SCADE generated software is targeted due to its prevalence in hard real-time systems and the ease with which it can be randomly varied. The Freescale MPC5554, commonly used in the automotive and aerospace domains, is used as the target hardware.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.019

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE DataPortFrench-language works237,207