MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091105021 · doi:10.1109/compsacw.2012.87

A Conceptual Framework for Open Source Software Test Process

2012· article· en· W2091105021 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
TopicOpen Source Software Innovations
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpen sourceOpen source softwareProcess (computing)Software engineeringComputer scienceTest (biology)SoftwareSoftware qualityOperating systemSoftware development

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The broad acceptance and use of Open Source Software (OSS) has underscored the necessity of investigating the means of assuring their quality. With the aim of identifying an OSS test process, three well-known OSS projects, namely Apache HTTP server, Mozilla Web browser, and NetBeans IDE were studied. In these studies, three activities were found similar to the activities of the ISO/IEC Test Process Standard. However, major differences were observed in tasks related to each of the test process activities. To systematize the OSS test process, an Open Source Software Test Process Framework (OSS-TPF) is proposed. The alignment of OSS-TPF with the ISO/IEC Test Process Standard is illustrated.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.680
Threshold uncertainty score0.585

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOpen Source Software InnovationsFrench-language works237,207