MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003425182 · doi:10.1147/sj.432.0384

WebSphere Studio overview

2004· article· en· W2003425182 on OpenAlexaff
Frank Budinsky, G. DeCandio, Ralph H. Earle, Terri Francis, J. Jones, J. Li, Martin Nally, C. J. Nelin, Valentina Popescu, Samantha Rozier Rich, Arthur Ryman, Tracey Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueIBM Systems Journal · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicService-Oriented Architecture and Web Services
Canadian institutionsIBM (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIBMSoftware engineeringStudioEclipseComputer scienceWeb serviceApplication serverVariety (cybernetics)Web applicationSystems engineeringWorld Wide WebEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we provide an overview of IBM WebSphere Studio, a family of tools for developing distributed applications for J2EE™ servers for state-of-the-art information technology systems. In today's business environment such systems are complex, comprise multiple platforms, and make use of a wide range of technologies and standards. Through a representative development scenario we illustrate the way WebSphere Studio satisfies the challenging requirements for a modern integrated development environment. The scenario covers a variety of technologies and standards, including database access, Web services standards, Enterprise JavaBeans™ implementation, integrated application testing, Web page design, and performance optimization. We also describe the Eclipse Modeling Framework, the open source technology base on which WebSphere Studio is built.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.137

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0410.036

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.232 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations15
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIBM Systems JournalSame topicService-Oriented Architecture and Web ServicesFrench-language works237,207