MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098007560 · doi:10.5539/cis.v8n4p51

A Smart Algorithm for USE-Cases Production Based on Name Entity Recognition

2015· article· en· W2098007560 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rafeeq Al Hashemi, Moha'med Al‐Jaafreh, Tahseen Al-Ramadin, Ayman Al-Dmour

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer and Information Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Engineering Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceUnified Modeling LanguageUse Case DiagramProcess (computing)SoftwareSet (abstract data type)Finite-state machineNatural languageProgramming languagePlain textNatural language processingSoftware engineeringClass diagramAlgorithmArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Use case analysis is a common technique used to ascertain the functional requirements of a software system. A use case diagram is a kind of Unified Modeling Language (UML) diagram created for use case analysis. Creating effective use cases can be a determining factor in building a system that meets users' needs. However, writing use cases is a difficult and time-consuming process, requiring the user to manually fill out a form or write text in a specific, pre-stipulated format. Many students lack the technical knowhow to do this. Our research offers a software solution that resolves this issue. By combining natural language algorithms, such as Part Of Speech (POS) and Name Entity recognition (NE), with a set of grammatical rules created and implemented as a Finite State Machine (FSM), our system extracts the relevant items from the text and automatically translates the plain or unstructured text into a structured one. The paper has been tested on standard examples with excellent results.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.807

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.011
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer and Information ScienceSame topicSoftware Engineering ResearchFrench-language works237,207