MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2033170485 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2008.4564898

An integrated approach to security in software development methodologies

2008· article· en· W2033170485 on OpenAlex
Abhay Raman, Steven Muegge

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueConference proceedings - Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Engineering Techniques and Practices
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoftware security assuranceSocial software engineeringSoftware developmentSecurity engineeringComputer scienceSoftware engineeringSoftware Engineering Process GroupSoftware constructionSoftware requirementsDomain (mathematical analysis)Personal software processSoftware development processSoftwareComputer securityInformation securitySecurity serviceOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Software today is critical in every domain of society and business and it is paramount that this software be secure. Traditionally, the disciplines of software engineering and security engineering have worked in separate silos, and when system requirements conflict with retrofitted security mechanisms, vulnerabilities result. We argue that security engineering and software engineering can be addressed together, and we propose an integrated model that aligns and entwines these processes. We present insights from applying this secure software engineering model in a software development project, and discuss implications for further research in secure software engineering.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.204 · 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