MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2001227102 · doi:10.1145/1370837.1370846

Seven essentials of software process

2008· article· en· W2001227102 on OpenAlexaff
Hakan Erdogmus

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicScientific Computing and Data Management
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPragmatismCraftEmpiricismStrengths and weaknessesGrassrootsComputer scienceProcess (computing)SoftwareValue (mathematics)Convergence (economics)Focus (optics)Orientation (vector space)Software developmentSoftware development processSoftware engineeringEngineering ethicsEpistemologyEngineeringPolitical scienceMathematicsGeographyProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A hybrid view of software development has risen from the collision and convergence of grassroots and craft-based process trends with research and engineering-based ones. In this talk, I will first explain the seven essential characteristics of this contemporary view: human-centricity, pragmatism, discipline, technical orientation, empiricism, experimentation, and value orientation. These characteristics are not simply complementary: they are mutually reinforcing and mutually balancing. I will then focus on the seventh characteristic, value orientation, in terms of how it interacts with the remaining characteristics. The resulting thinking sheds light to weaknesses and strengths of current packaged approaches, and how successful software development is expected to unfold and effective strategies will be uncovered in the era to come.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.050
Scholarly communication0.0170.030
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0040.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.193
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicScientific Computing and Data Management→French-language works237,207→