MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995689188 · doi:10.1002/spip.225

Staged configuration through specialization and multilevel configuration of feature models

2005· article· en· W1995689188 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSoftware Process Improvement and Practice · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Software Engineering Methodologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeature (linguistics)AbstractionFeature modelComputer scienceCardinality (data modeling)NotationConfiguration designProduct (mathematics)ConfiguratorProcess (computing)Theoretical computer scienceProgramming languageData miningSoftwareMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Feature modeling is a key technique for capturing commonalities and variabilities in system families and product lines. In this article, we propose a cardinality‐based notation for feature modeling, which integrates a number of existing extensions of previous approaches. We then introduce and motivate the novel concept of staged configuration. Staged configuration can be achieved by the stepwise specialization of feature models or by multilevel configuration, where the configuration choices available in each stage are defined by separate feature models. Staged configuration is important because, in a realistic development process, different groups and different people make product configuration choices in different stages. Finally, we also discuss how multilevel configuration avoids a breakdown between the different abstraction levels of individual features. This problem, sometimes referred to as 'analysis paralysis', easily occurs in feature modeling because features can denote entities at arbitrary levels of abstraction within a system family. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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.

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.907
Threshold uncertainty score0.674

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.005
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.283 · 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