MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116417629 · doi:10.1109/wcre.2005.10

Boxology of NBA and TA: A Basis for Understanding Software Architecture

2006· article· en· W2116417629 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
TopicAdvanced Software Engineering Methodologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceProgramming languageTheoretical computer scienceArchitectureSoftwareSoftware architectureHierarchySoftware architecture descriptionSoftware engineeringReference architecture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Box-and-arrow diagrams seem inevitable for presentation of software architecture; however, the term "boxology" often mocks their over-use, especially when informal. We introduce in this paper a formal boxology to serve as a semantic domain for graph-based software architecture representation languages: the nested boxes and arrows (NBA) model. NBA graphs use commonly-adopted features of structure diagrams for software: boxes for objects, arrows for relations, attributes for values, and a containment hierarchy. NBA graphs are visualized using a number of conventions, and are transmitted in exchange languages such as GXL and TA. The NBA model is formalized as typed graphs with attributes and an identified spanning tree (containment). Meta-modeling is defined and formalized by schemas, which are also NBA graphs. The universal schema is defined. A number of tools have been developed to query, manipulate and visualize NBA graphs

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.163
Threshold uncertainty score0.312

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.225 · 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