MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

4.4.3 Using A System Object Methodology in Software Intensive Systems

2000· article· en· W1564156473 on OpenAlexaff
Richard B. Wray

Bibliographic record

VenueINCOSE International Symposium · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicService-Oriented Architecture and Web Services
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSoftware systemSoftware engineeringObject-oriented designSystems engineeringSoftware developmentObject-oriented programmingSystems development life cycleObject (grammar)Context (archaeology)Unified Modeling LanguageSoftware development processSoftwareProgramming languageArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Systems Engineering typically relies upon functionally oriented system definition. However, for software intensive systems that rely upon object‐oriented development, functionally oriented system definition provides insufficient input to software development. Development of object‐oriented software can be improved by providing input to the software process using an object‐oriented system methodology that merges precepts from the Fusion Methodology and the Unified Modeling Language. A hybrid system object methodology must establish at least the user/system context and the models of the key elements of a system design (including the system object model, life cycle model and operations model). Relationships between these models in the methodology include definition of the system boundary, classes and attributes of objects, events and system operations. This paper summarizes underlying object modeling precepts important to systems engineering and describes this hybrid system object 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.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.466
Threshold uncertainty score0.855

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 science0.0020.000
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.260 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueINCOSE International SymposiumSame topicService-Oriented Architecture and Web ServicesFrench-language works237,207