Preliminary Proceedings 15th International Workshop on Expressiveness in Concurrency:EXPRESS'08 Toronto, Canada 23 August 2008
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The EXPRESS workshops aim at bringing together researchers interested in the relations between various formal systems, particularly in the field of Concurrency. More specifically, they focus on the comparison between programming concepts (such as concurrent, functional, imperative, logic and object-oriented programming) and between mathematical models of computation (such as process algebras, Petri nets, event structures, modal logics, rewrite systems etc.) on the basis of their relative expressive power. This year EXPRESS is co-located with CONCUR '08, held in Toronto. In response to the call for papers, we received one short paper and 12 full papers. The program committee selected 8 of the full papers for presentation at the workshop. In addition, the workshop contains two invited presentations, by Michele Bugliesi (invited jointly with the SECCO workshop) and Gianluigi Zavattaro. The selected full papers and abstracts for the invited talks appear in these preliminary proceedings. We would like to thank the authors of the submitted papers, the invited speakers, the members of the program committee, and their subreferees for their contribution to both the meeting and this volume. Also we thank the CONCUR organising committee for hosting EXPRESS '08, and Richard Trefler for the local organization of the workshops and arranging the printing of these preliminary proceedings, which were compiled by Espen Højsgaard. The final proceedings will become available electronically at Elsevier's web site http://www.elsevier.com/locate/entcs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.116 | 0.035 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".