MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

1.3.2 A Vision for Super‐Model Driven Systems Engineering

2007· article· en· W2080470304 on OpenAlexaff
Stephen Piggott, Philip Melanson, Leo Hartman

Bibliographic record

VenueINCOSE International Symposium · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicModel-Driven Software Engineering Techniques
Canadian institutionsCanadian Space Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSystems Modeling LanguageComputer scienceAgile software developmentDomain (mathematical analysis)Systems engineeringSoftware engineeringPoint (geometry)Unified Modeling LanguageSoftwareEngineeringProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Model‐Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) has been developing for some time, and has recently acquired new impetus with the completion of the Systems Modeling Language (SysML). This paper envisions taking MBSE much further, to a future of highly integrated and automated design and verification coupled with advances in simulation and domain linkage to allow the synthesis of complete systems from requirements into mathematical models and then into physical realizations. This would permit the application of three of the most successful approaches from agile software development, namely rapid, iterative development of the system starting with the highest value functions, facilitating continual reassessment of the future direction, and continual regression testing to ensure that system bugs are identified and removed rapidly. We envisage the requirements and the model evolving together from proto‐requirements and proto‐model in increasing detail until the point at which the model can be realized with real hardware and software. Taking this further, the MBSE engine can perform trade‐offs and optimization on the design. Implementing this vision requires progress in a number of technologies, such as data exchange between domain tools. At this time, much engineering effort is consumed in people communicating and mediating information and translating it from one form to another (e.g. system design to mechanical design). If we can realize the vision proposed, we can remove much of the burden of information mediation and optimization, allowing engineers to focus on their expertise and larger issues. The potential savings in labour are huge.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.007
Scholarly communication0.0080.011
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0050.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueINCOSE International SymposiumSame topicModel-Driven Software Engineering TechniquesFrench-language works237,207