{"id":"W2107024044","doi":"10.1109/tse.2006.38","title":"On the value of static analysis for fault detection in software","year":2006,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering","topic":"Software Engineering Research","field":"Computer Science","cited_by":281,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"ca_institutions":"Nortel (Canada)","funders":"North Carolina State University; National Science Foundation","keywords":"Static analysis; Computer science; Fault detection and isolation; Software; Software quality; Reliability engineering; Software bug; Programmer; Software reliability testing; Fault (geology); Static program analysis; Data mining; Software development; Embedded system; Operating system; Artificial intelligence; Programming language; Engineering","routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":false},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.006543355,0.001120051,0.0007380307,0.00580374,0.0007779919,0.002279223,0.0008768096,0.000882963,0.001451667],"category_scores_gemma":[0.04226043,0.0004772612,0.0007592982,0.002958377,0.003478596,0.004967668,0.0007291718,0.0009961132,0.0005415329],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.001047457,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.001162361,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002920281,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.002582627,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9898165,0.004996632,0.000389346,0.0005871852,0.00392152,0.0002886416],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.8912511,0.09136163,0.0039415,0.006717937,0.006354789,0.0003730584],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0008389478,0.0003518228,0.07842284,0.0004414164,0.0003010699,0.0004512901,0.0006417152,0.172008,0.01909464,0.02488857,0.001529847,0.7010298],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000784717,0.001631015,0.055132,0.0003846236,0.0003931136,0.001434816,0.0005844062,0.7966369,0.03785539,0.09934291,0.00615851,0.0003678201],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"methods","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.4436477,0.006458679,0.5323845,0.002100173,0.0001299043,0.0001740735,0.0002401182,0.002478237,0.01238667],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9221358,0.001151961,0.07539402,0.0001519697,0.00009865635,0.00005144287,0.0001135871,0.0001338617,0.0007687047],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.006543355,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.03460497,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.01146549923645789,"score_gpt":0.2358461180225872,"score_spread":0.2243806187861293,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","note":"Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed). Scores rank; they never assert a category."}}