MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035328191 · doi:10.1145/1404946.1404951

Aspect-oriented use case modeling for software product lines

2008· article· en· W2035328191 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Software Engineering Methodologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReusabilityMaintainabilityExecutableComputer scienceReuseModularity (biology)Software engineeringSoftware product lineAspect-oriented programmingSoftware developmentSoftwareSeparation of concernsSystems engineeringProgramming languageEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Software Product Line Development advocates software reuse by modeling common and variable artefacts separately across members of a family of products. Aspect-Oriented Software Development aims at separation of concerns with "aspects" to increase modularity, reusability, maintainability and ease of evolution. In this paper, we apply an aspect-oriented use case modeling approach to product line system modeling. A use case specification captures stakeholders concerns as interactions between a system and its actors. We adapt our previous work with the introduction of a «variability» relationship for the expression of variabilities. This relationship is used to model variable and common behaviours across a family of products as use cases. A variability composition mechanism enables building of executable behaviour models for each member of a product line family by integrating common elements with the applicable variable elements.

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.612

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.139
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.176 · 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