MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128138035 · doi:10.1109/wpc.2002.1021340

Fused data-centric visualizations for software evolution environments

2003· article· en· W2128138035 on OpenAlexafffund
Jens H. Jahnke, Hausi Müller, Andrew Walenstein, Nikolai Mansurov, K. Wong

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Engineering Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceVisualizationAbstractionSoftware visualizationHierarchySuiteSoftware evolutionSoftwareSoftware engineeringHuman–computer interactionData visualizationSoftware systemSoftware architectureData scienceComponent-based software engineeringSoftware constructionData miningProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During software evolution, several different facets of the system need to be related to one another at multiple levels of abstraction. Current software evolution tools have limited capabilities for effectively visualizing and evolving multiple system facets in an integrated manner. Many tools provide methods for tracking and relating different levels of abstraction within a single facet. However, it is less well understood how to represent and understand relationships between and among different abstraction hierarchies, i.e. for inter-hierarchy relations. Often, these are represented and explored independently, making them difficult to relate to one another. As a result, engineers are likely to have difficulty understanding how the various facets of a system relate and interact. We describe preliminary results of a collaborative research project between industry and academia to enhance the inter-hierarchy visualization capabilities of an existing software evolution environment called "KLOCwork Suite". Specifically, we describe our efforts to add a "fused" visualization based on story board diagrams. This visualization integrates - or "fuses" - facets of architecture, behavior and data. We describe how these diagrams bridge currently isolated visualizations of system information, and argue how they can help drive architecture excavation tasks.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.709
Threshold uncertainty score0.327

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations10
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware Engineering ResearchFrench-language works237,207