MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1603590591 · doi:10.35793/jti.4.2.2014.6989

IMPLEMENTASI PROSES UJI SISTEM INFORMASI ADMISI PASCASARJANA UNIVERSITAS SAM RATULANGI

2015· article· id· W1603590591 on OpenAlexaff
Eko Pandara, Stanley Karouw, Meicsy E.I. Najoan

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Teknik Informatika · 2015
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldComputer Science
TopicEdcuational Technology Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsHumanitiesSoftware testingOperating systemComputer scienceArtSoftware

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstrak Kualitas Perangkat Lunak menjadi hal yang sangat penting di era perkembangan teknologi informasi yang pesat saat ini. Untuk mengukur apakah suatu perangkat lunak berkualitas maka harus dilakukan pengujian. Pengujian (Testing) adalah proses menganalisa suatu entitas software untuk mendeteksi perbedaan antara kondisi yang ada dengan kondisi yang di inginkan untuk menemukan defects/ errors/ bugs dan mengevaluasi fitur-fitur dari entitas software. Demikian juga dalam pengembangan Sistem Informasi Admisi Pasca Sarjana UNSRAT perlu dilaksanakan pengujian untuk menemukan bug sehingga kemudian dapat dilaporkan kepada tim pengembang. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menemukan dan mendaftrakan bug yang terjadi pada Sistem Informasi Admisi Pasca Sarjana UNSRAT. Metode yang digunakan adalah metode Verifikasi dan Validasi. Yang menjadi inti dari metode ini adalah pengujian. Pengujian dilaksanakan dengan menggunakan teknik-teknik pengujian sepeti Required Based Testing, White Box Testing, Black Box Testing, dan Basic Path Testing. Proses Pengujian menggunakan Requirement Based Testing Framework yang digunakan oleh RIM bekerja sama dengan University of Waterloo. Hasil penelitian diperoleh hasil berupa daftar error yang terjadi pada perangkat lunak Sistem Informasi Admisi Pasca Sarjana UNSRAT, dan dalam proses pengujian dihasilkan dokumentasi test plan document, test suite document, test report document. Error yang terjadi adalah kesalahan fungsi beberapa fitur yang tidak berjalan baik, kesalahan pada antarmuka yang mengganggu estetika interkasi manusia dan komputer. Kata Kunci: Perangkat Lunak, Pengujian, Verifikasi & Validasi

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.194

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0580.041

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Teknik InformatikaSame topicEdcuational Technology SystemsFrench-language works237,207