MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004416088 · doi:10.1145/1598732.1598762

Report of the workshop on software engineering foundations for end-user programming

2009· article· en· W2004416088 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Grace A. Lewis, Dennis Smith, Len Bass, Brad A. Myers

Bibliographic record

VenueACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpreadsheets and End-User Computing
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoftware engineeringComputer scienceEnd userSoftware developmentSocial software engineeringSoftwareProcess (computing)Focus (optics)Software constructionEngineering managementEngineeringWorld Wide WebProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Workshop on Software Engineering Foundations for End-User Programming (SEEUP) was held at the 33rd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE) in Vancouver, British Columbia on May 23, 2009. This workshop discussed end-user programming with a specific focus on the software engineering that is required to make it a more disciplined process, while still hiding the complexities of greater discipline from the end user. Speakers covered how to understand the problems and needs of the real end users of end-user programming. The discussion focused on the software engineering and supporting technology that would have to be in place to address these problems and needs.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.128

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0080.008
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0030.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0380.011

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.237 · 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
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

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering NotesSame topicSpreadsheets and End-User ComputingFrench-language works237,207