An Efficient Explicit-time Description Method for Timed Model Checking
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Timed model checking, the method to formally verify real-time systems, is attracting increasing attention from both the model checking community and the real-time community. Explicit-time description methods verify real-time systems using general model constructs found in standard un-timed model checkers. Lamport proposed an explicit-time description method using a clock-ticking process (Tick) to simulate the passage of time together with a group of global variables to model time requirements. Two methods, the Sync-based Explicit-time Description Method using rendezvous synchronization steps and the Semaphore-based Explicit-time Description Method using only one global variable were proposed; they both achieve better modularity than Lamport's method in modeling the real-time systems. In contrast to timed automata based model checkers like UPPAAL, explicit-time description methods can access and store the current time instant for future calculations necessary for many real-time systems, especially those with pre-emptive scheduling. However, the Tick process in the above three methods increments the time by one unit in each tick; the state spaces therefore grow relatively fast as the time parameters increase, a problem when the system's time period is relatively long. In this paper, we propose a more efficient method which enables the Tick process to leap multiple time units in one tick. Preliminary experimental results in a high performance computing environment show that this new method significantly reduces the state space and improves both the time and memory efficiency.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".