MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097502555 · doi:10.1109/aiccsa.2001.934047

CORBA-based e-commerce application testing architecture

2002· article· en· W2097502555 on OpenAlexafffund
Robert L. Probert, W. Li

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed and Parallel Computing Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCommon Object Request Broker ArchitectureComputer scienceArchitectureDistributed computingTestabilityDistributed objectSystem testingObject request brokerSystems architectureSoftware engineeringEmbedded systemReliability engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

E-commerce systems are specialized instances of distributed processing systems. The Common Object Request Broker Architecture (CORBA) provides a sophisticated infrastructure to develop and deploy distributed objects. As systems become more complex and geographically distributed, it is becoming increasingly difficult to conduct cost-effective, systematic and comprehensive testing on such systems. Using CORBA to facilitate the development and testing of e-commerce systems can greatly improve testability and directly shorten the time-to-market cycle by decreasing the test effort. This paper proposes a practical CORBA-based approach called CDATA (e-Commerce Development And Testing Approach), which supports both functional and performance testing of multiple distributed CUTs (components under test). The approach is illustrated by the implementation of an experimental e-commerce system and the corresponding testing architecture.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDistributed and Parallel Computing SystemsFrench-language works237,207