Hacker or hero? - extreme programming today (panel session)
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Article Free Access Share on Hacker or hero? - extreme programming today (panel session) Authors: Steven Fraser Nortel Networks Nortel NetworksView Profile , Kent Beck First Class Software First Class SoftwareView Profile , Ward Cunningham Cunningham & Cunningham Cunningham & CunninghamView Profile , Ron Crocker Motorola MotorolaView Profile , Martin Fowler ThoughtWorks ThoughtWorksView Profile , Linda Rising View Profile , Laurie Williams NC State NC StateView Profile Authors Info & Claims OOPSLA '00: Addendum to the 2000 proceedings of the conference on Object-oriented programming, systems, languages, and applications (Addendum)January 2000 Pages 5–7https://doi.org/10.1145/367845.367892Online:01 January 2000Publication History 1citation1,224DownloadsMetricsTotal Citations1Total Downloads1,224Last 12 Months19Last 6 weeks4 Get Citation AlertsNew Citation Alert added!This alert has been successfully added and will be sent to:You will be notified whenever a record that you have chosen has been cited.To manage your alert preferences, click on the button below.Manage my AlertsNew Citation Alert!Please log in to your account Save to BinderSave to BinderCreate a New BinderNameCancelCreateExport CitationPublisher SiteeReaderPDF
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it