MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118715464 · doi:10.1109/icws.2009.62

A Dependency Impact Analysis Model for Web Services Evolution

2009· article· en· W2118715464 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
TopicService-Oriented Architecture and Web Services
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDependency (UML)Computer scienceWeb serviceDependency graphService (business)Change impact analysisWS-PolicyWorld Wide WebSoftware engineeringGraphProcess managementSoftwareWeb developmentWeb application securityEngineeringTheoretical computer scienceBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As many software systems have been turned as Web services, the evolutionary changes of Web services are becoming an important issue. To understand the way in which the change affects the services, we must ascertain parts of the system that will be effected by the change and examine them for additional impacts. In this paper, we propose an impact analysis model based on service dependency. In particular, the service dependency graph model, service dependency and the relation matrix are examined. Based on the shift and calculation of the matrix, the dependency and impact of the service evolution can be analyzed and its quantity can be ascertained. Furthermore, we also represent an approach for service change annotation and for service evolution process. Overall, these works provide a foundation for the automatic management, control, and evaluation of service evolution.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.824
Threshold uncertainty score0.616

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.257 · 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