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
To date, most research on software code cloning has concentrated on detection and analysis techniques and their evaluation, and most empirical studies of cloning have investigated cloning within single system versions. In this paper, we present the results of a longitudinal study of cloning among the SCSI drivers for the Linux operating system that spans 16 years of evolution. We have chosen the SCSI driver subsystem as a test subject as it is known that cloning has been embraced by these developers as a design practice: when a new SCSI card comes out that is similar to an old one, but different enough to warrant its own implementation, a new driver may be cloned from an existing one. We discuss the results of our qualitative and quantitative analyses, including how the layered architecture of the SCSI subsystem seems to have affected the use of cloning as a design tool, the likelihood of consistent and inconsistent change over time, and the predictive power of using cloning between two independent driver implementations to model the similarity between two target devices.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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