MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W171582639 · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-30454-5_3

DPF Workbench: A Diagrammatic Multi-Layer Domain Specific (Meta-)Modelling Environment

2012· book-chapter· en· W171582639 on OpenAlexaff
Yngve Lamo, Xiaoliang Wang, Florian Mantz, Wendy MacCaull, Adrian Rutle

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in computational intelligence · 2012
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicModel-Driven Software Engineering Techniques
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetamodelingComputer scienceDiagrammatic reasoningProgramming languageWorkbenchWorkflowTheoretical computer scienceGraphDomain (mathematical analysis)Domain-specific languageGraph rewritingSoftware engineeringArtificial intelligenceVisualizationDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.122

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0370.015

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 head0.297
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.037 · 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 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

Citations27
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueStudies in computational intelligenceSame topicModel-Driven Software Engineering TechniquesFrench-language works237,207