MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108761763 · doi:10.1109/ease.2009.11

Change Support in Adaptive Software: A Case Study for Fine-Grained Adaptation

2009· article· en· W2108761763 on OpenAlexaff
Mazeiar Salehie, Sen Li, Reza Asadollahi, Ladan Tahvildari

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Software Engineering Methodologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdaptation (eye)Computer scienceGranularityHierarchyContext (archaeology)Software evolutionSet (abstract data type)Software engineeringSoftware systemSoftwareAdaptive systemSoftware constructionArtificial intelligenceProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adaptive software is a closed-loop system which aims at adjusting itself in different situations at runtime. This paper looks at adaptation as changes in the context of dynamic software evolution, and proposes a conceptual model for these changes based on Activity Theory. This model consists of a hierarchy of activities making changes, and the objectives motivating these changes. This model is an attempt towards establishing a formal framework for designing adaptive software systems. While the proposed model is applicable to any type of adaptation, at different levels of granularity of various software systems, the paper focuses only on fine-grained adaptation changes. As a case study, a mission-critical e-commerce system, TPC-W, isused to apply the proposed model and evaluate the effectiveness of fine-grained adaptation changes. The conducted set of experiments aims at evaluating self-optimizing and self-configuring adaptation activities performed through several fine-grained actions such as service-level upgrading/degrading.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.164
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations15
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Software Engineering MethodologiesFrench-language works237,207