1 / 7

Predicting Task Automata Needed in FLAVERS Analysis

Predicting Task Automata Needed in FLAVERS Analysis. Kris Hauman CRA-W DMP participant Computing Research Association Committee on the Status of Women in Computing Research Distributed Mentor Project. Motivation and Goals.

yael
Download Presentation

Predicting Task Automata Needed in FLAVERS Analysis

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Predicting Task Automata Needed in FLAVERS Analysis Kris Hauman CRA-W DMP participant Computing Research Association Committee on the Status of Women in Computing Research Distributed Mentor Project

  2. Motivation and Goals The user usually has to make several iterations of choosing constraints and running the analysis. If FLAVERS could predict at least some of the needed TAs, it could save the user some time.

  3. Potential Ways of Predicting • alphabet-related tasks • communication-related tasks

  4. Finding related tasks • alphabet-related tasks Given an FSA and a TFG, Returns a set of tasks T such that T = {t | t  G  e [e  FSA  e  t e ≠ tau]} • communication-related tasks Given a task t1 and a TFG, Returns a set of tasks T such that T = {t | t  G  n [n  Nt1  n  Ntn = com-node  t1 ≠ t2]}

  5. Observations on related-tasks usefulness • 100% At least one property-related TA was needed. • ~58% All TAs needed were property-related. • ~44% At least one property-related task was not needed.

  6. Observations on related-tasks usefulness • In ~73% of examples with needed property-unrelated TAs, all of the needed property-unrelated TAs were com-related to needed property-related TAs. • In ~67% of examples with needed VAs, all needed TAs were constraint-related to a needed VA. Only 36 examples examined; Different combinations of needed TAs can be used.

  7. More Experimenting Given an analysis problem with (estimated) min. TAs and an analysis problem with: • all property-related TAs • some property-related TAs • property-related and com-related to those • constraint-related • constraint-related and com-related to those • property, constraint, and com-related to both Compare the TAs used, analysis results, and run-times.

More Related