Decomposing object-oriented class modules using an agglomerative clustering technique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Software can be considered a live entity, as it undergoes many alterations throughout its lifecycle. Furthermore, developers do not usually retain a good design in favor of adding new features, comply with requirements or meet deadlines. For these reasons, code can become rather complex and difficult to understand. More particularly in object-oriented systems, classes may become very large and less cohesive. In order to identify such problematic cases, existing approaches have proposed the use of cohesion metrics. However, while metrics can identify classes with low cohesion, they cannot identify new or independent concepts. Moreover, these methods require a lot of human interpretation to identify the respective design flaws. In this paper, we propose a class decomposition method using an agglomerative clustering algorithm based on the Jaccard distance between class members. Our methodology is able to identify new concepts and rank the solutions according to their impact on the design quality of the system. Finally, our method has been evaluated by two independent designers who were asked to comment on the suggestions produced by our technique on their projects. The designers provided feedback on the ability of the method to identify new concepts and improve the design quality of the system in terms of cohesion.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".