MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W112652389

Agent- Oriented Software Development: A Case Study.

2001· article· en· W112652389 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMulti-Agent Systems and Negotiation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoftware developmentComputer scienceTask (project management)Software engineeringSoftware development processSoftwareAgent-oriented software engineeringRequirements analysisResource (disambiguation)Knowledge managementEngineeringSystems engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We are developing a methodology, called Tropos, for building agent-oriented software systems. The methodology covers five software development phases: early requirements analysis, late requirements analysis, architectural design, detailed design, and implementation. Throughout, the concepts offered by i* are used to model both the stakeholders in the system's environment, and the system itself. These concepts include actors, who can be (social) agents (organizational, human or software), positions or roles, goals, and social dependencies for defining the obligations of actors to other actors (called dependees and dependers respectively.) Dependencies may involve a goal, to be fulfilled by the dependee on behalf of the depender, a task to be carried out by the dependee, or a resource to be delivered. The paper presents a case study to illustrate the features and the strengths of the Tropos methodology.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.560
Threshold uncertainty score0.356

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Quick stats

Citations30
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMulti-Agent Systems and NegotiationFrench-language works237,207