MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128152347 · doi:10.1109/cmpsac.2001.960601

MOOSE - a task-driven program comprehension environment

2002· article· en· W2128152347 on OpenAlexaffabout
Juergen Rilling, Ahmed Seffah

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Engineering Research
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProgram comprehensionWizardComputer scienceSoftware visualizationSource codeProgram slicingComprehensionVisualizationTask (project management)Software engineeringHuman–computer interactionReverse engineeringSoftwareProgramming languageSoftware systemWorld Wide WebSoftware constructionArtificial intelligenceSystems engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many tools have been developed to derive abstract representations from existing source code. Yet, most of these tools provide only little help in providing an encompassing picture of the system under examination. Graphical visualization techniques derived from reverse engineered source code have long been recognized for their impact on improving the comprehensibility of software systems and their source code. In this paper, we present a task-oriented approach to software comprehension by introducing our MOOSE (Montreal Object-Oriented Slicing Environment) environment that provides a task-driven wizard approach that supports a cognitive comprehension model combined with reverse engineering techniques, algorithmic and visualization support. We close our discussion with a brief overview of typical software comprehension tasks and how the MOOSE environment will benefit users during these comprehension 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 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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

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

Citations3
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware Engineering ResearchFrench-language works237,207