MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6912068948 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.15605218

Performance Dataset for Hardware Model Checking on Btor2 Benchmarks (Technical Report, May 2025)

2025· article· en· W6912068948 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBenchmark (surveying)Set (abstract data type)Construct (python library)Scripting languageSelection (genetic algorithm)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This technical report presents a performance evaluation of several hardware model-checking tools on a collection of benchmark tasks in the Btor2 format.The resulting dataset is intended to support machine-learning research for hardware model checking, particularly in areas such as algorithm selection,performance prediction, and automated tool configuration. It has been used, for example, in the development and evaluation of Btor2-Select, a machine-learning-based algorithm selection framework for hardware model checking. To construct the dataset, we benchmarked a diverse set of model-checking tools and algorithmic configurations. Each verification engine was evaluated on a common set of Btor2 tasks and the performance measurements, including CPU time, wall time, and memory usage, were collected. All data, including scripts and files required to reproduce the experiments, are publicly available at: https://gitlab.com/sosy-lab/research/data/perf-eval-hwmc/-/tree/1.0.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.907
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.299
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