MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W187393762

Implémentation à l'aide de BPEL de trois processus d'agrégation de composants, dirigée par les modèles

2006· article· fr· W187393762 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anis Masmoudi, Gilbert Paquette, Roger Champagne

Bibliographic record

VenueEspace ÉTS (ETS) · 2006
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicModel-Driven Software Engineering Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesComponent-based software engineeringComputer scienceSoftware engineeringSoftware developmentArtProgramming languageSoftware
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RESUME. Plusieurs organisations qui œuvrent dans le domaine d’apprentissage a distance utilisent le composant logiciel comme unite de base pour construire leur systeme. Ils ne developpent presque plus de nouveaux composants, mais ils les reutilisent et appliquent des reingenieries pour des fins d’adaptation aux nouveaux contextes. Ceci prouve que le developpement logiciel par agregation des composants est un sujet d’interet. Cette branche du genie logiciel constitue un des axes fondamentaux du projet canadien LORNET (Learning Object Repositories’ NETworsk). Cet article donne suite a des travaux publies l’an dernier, proposant principalement d’adjoindre aux composants logiciels certains types de metadonnees que nous avons intitule SOCOM (SOftware COmponent Metadata). Nous avons defini trois types d’agregations avec des exemples concrets. Dans le present article, nous rappelons brievement ces metadonnees et les categories d’agregation existantes et proposees et nous utilisons un langage d’execution de processus metier intitule BPEL (Business Process Execution Language) pour implementer des categories d’agregation tels que : Collection, Coordination et Fusion. ABSTRACT. Many organizations research on develop eLearning environments based on software components as their system’s base construct. They don’t develop new components, but they reuse existing ones. They apply software engineering concepts such as reengineering, reverse engineering and software components reuse. System development based on software components is an important issue also in LORNET project (Learning Object Repositories’ NETworks). This paper extends some previous work. We remind briefly our SOCOM (SOftware COmponent Metadata, metadata structure that characterizes software components) and we explain shortly our aggregation classification based on three attributes from SOCOM. Afterwards we use BPEL as a business process execution language to help us to implement our three designed aggregation’s categories: aggregation by collection, by coordination and by fusion.

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)0.006
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.236 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEspace ÉTS (ETS)Same topicModel-Driven Software Engineering TechniquesFrench-language works237,207