MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2140921887 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2003.1226140

The utility of graph theoretic software metrics: a case study

2004· article· en· W2140921887 on OpenAlexafffund
Aleksander Demko, Nick J. Pizzi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Engineering Research
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Institute for Biodiagnostics
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceSoftware sizingSoftwareSoftware metricCall graphTheoretical computer scienceSoftware constructionSoftware developmentInheritance (genetic algorithm)Class (philosophy)GraphSoftware visualizationData miningSoftware engineeringObject-oriented programmingProgramming languageArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The adoption of and adherence to object-oriented design and programming principles have allowed the software industry to create applications of ever-increasing complexity. A concomitant need arises for strategies to identify, manage, and, wherever possible, reduce this software complexity. One such strategy is the systematic collection, interpretation, and analysis of software metrics, mappings from software objects or constructs to sets of numerical features that quantify relevant software attributes. We describe a novel approach that employs various graph theoretic algorithms to analyze the higher level, application-wide class relationship graphs that emerge from object-oriented software. In addition to the software's overall inheritance tree characteristics, these algorithms will use metrics that reflect information on the import and export coupling of class-attribute and class-method relationships. Further, we incorporate information relating to the response sets for each object in the software, that is, the number of methods that can be executed in response to messages being received by objects.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware Engineering Research→French-language works237,207→