MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027204548 · doi:10.1145/2557833.2560584

Leveraging machine learning and information retrieval techniques in software evolution tasks

2014· article· en· W2027204548 on OpenAlexaff
Lucia, David Lo, Giuseppe Scanniello, Alessandro Marchetto, Nasir Ali, Collin McMillan

Bibliographic record

VenueACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Engineering Research
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSoftwareSoftware engineeringConjunction (astronomy)Software evolutionArtificial intelligenceMachine learningSoftware developmentSoftware constructionProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The first International Workshop on MAchine Learning and Information Retrieval for Software Evolution (MALIR-SE) was held on the 11th of November 2013. The workshop was held in conjunction with the 28th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE) in Silicon Valley, California, USA. The workshop brought researchers and practitioners that were interested in leveraging machine learning and information retrieval techniques to automate various software evolution tasks. During the workshop, papers on the application of machine learning and information retrieval techniques to bug fix time prediction and anti-pattern detection were presented. There were also discussions on the presented papers and on future direction of research in the area.

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)0.041
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0110.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.008
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering NotesSame topicSoftware Engineering ResearchFrench-language works237,207