MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046374478 · doi:10.1504/ijpmb.2007.015139

An agent oriented modelling technique for risk analysis and control in software projects

2007· article· en· W2046374478 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

VenueInternational Journal of Process Management and Benchmarking · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Software Engineering Methodologies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoftware project managementRisk analysis (engineering)Project managementRisk managementComputer scienceWork (physics)Control (management)SoftwareProject risk managementProcess managementSoftware developmentProject management triangleEngineeringSystems engineeringBusinessSoftware construction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present an approach project managers could use to model and control risks in software projects. The approach is helpful to project managers for performing means-end analysis, thereby uncovering the structural origin of risks in a project, and how the root-causes of such risks can be controlled from the early stages of the projects. We have illustrated this approach with a simple example typical of software development projects. Our work is restricted to providing a methodology that one can use in the existing risk management lifecycle models to analyse and uncover the structural origin of the risks, and control the risks from the early phases of a project.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.473
Threshold uncertainty score0.368

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.297 · 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