MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Ethics in Software Engineering

2007· book-chapter· en· W153163984 on OpenAlexaff
Pankaj Kamthan

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2007
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Engineering Techniques and Practices
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCredibilitySocial software engineeringPersonal software processHarmSoftware Engineering Process GroupSoftware developmentSoftware peer reviewContext (archaeology)SoftwareSoftware engineeringSoftware constructionSoftware walkthroughComputer scienceEngineeringPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are various reasons for discussing the issue of ethics within a software engineering context. By participating in a software development process, software engineers can influence the final product, namely the software itself, in different ways including those that may be contrary to public interest. In other words, they could engage in an unethical behavior, inadvertently or deliberately. This could lead to personal harm, and potentially result in loss of confidence in software and loss of trust in organizations that own them. This can adversely affect the acceptance of software as a useful product, question the credibility of software engineering as a profession, lead to legal implications, and impact the bottom line of the software industry at-large.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.594
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIGI Global eBooksSame topicSoftware Engineering Techniques and PracticesFrench-language works237,207