MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018873511 · doi:10.1145/1028174.971429

Developing principles of GUI programming using views

2004· article· en· W2018873511 on OpenAlexaff
Judith Bishop, Nigel Horspool

Bibliographic record

VenueACM SIGCSE Bulletin · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Engineering Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersMicrosoft Research
KeywordsComputer scienceProgramming languageProgrammerXMLNotationJavaEvent-driven programmingProgramming paradigmSoftware engineeringProcedural programmingInductive programmingOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes that GUI development is as important as other aspects of programming, such as a sound understanding of control structures and object orientation. Far less attention has been paid to the programming structures for GUIs and certainly there are few cross language principles to aid the programmer. We propose that principles of GUIs can be extracted and learnt, and that they do enhance good programming practice. These principles have been implemented in our Views system which features an XML-based GUI description notation coupled with an engine that shields the programmer from much of the intricate complexity associated with events, listeners and handlers. The system is programmed primarily in C# for .NET, but is available in various forms for Java and for other platforms which support .NET through the SSCLI.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.008
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.323
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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations19
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM SIGCSE BulletinSame topicSoftware Engineering ResearchFrench-language works237,207