Non-Functional Properties in Service Oriented Architecture – A Consumer's Perspective
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract—Information about non-functional properties (NFPs) is rarely explicitly described in Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) services. In particular, there is still no standardized solution addressing what service providers should expose or advertise as NFPs in service descriptions to empower service consumers to decide whether a given service suits best their needs or not. Our goal is to define a catalogue of generic (i.e., domain independent) nonfunctional properties to be considered when service descriptions are developed. This catalogue should be used to better characterize services and enable consumers to perform advanced applications such as NFP-aware service selection. We have identified an initial catalogue of SOA-related NFPs that are relevant from the perspective of consumers (as opposed to providers). Then, we have designed an online survey and invited international SOA experts in many application areas to criticize the relevance and definitions of the proposed NFPs and to enhance this catalogue. After analyzing the survey results to synthesize an improved catalogue, we have validated the new definitions a second time with a subset of the initial participants. We obtained a validated list of 17 NFP definitions for atomic SOA service descriptions relevant from a service consumer’s perspective.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it