MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143462919 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2004.1345078

Automating the transition from stakeholders' requests to use cases in OOAD

2004· article· en· W2143462919 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
TopicModel-Driven Software Engineering Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUse Case DiagramComputer scienceObject-oriented analysis and designParsingSoftware engineeringProcess (computing)AutomationTask (project management)Class diagramNatural languageSequence diagramUnified Modeling LanguageNatural language processingProgramming languageSystems engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The object model creation process (OMCP) is considered a major task in object-oriented analysis and design (OOAD). In the rational unified process (RUP), objects and classes are identified from the use case model, which is a combination of the use case diagram and the use case specification (UCS) document. The automation of the generation of the class model assumes that the UCS is complete, accurate and unambiguous. However, in reality, the UCS is written in free form natural language and is therefore likely to be ambiguous and complex. To avoid this problem, the use of case templates and guidelines is proposed for writing UCS. The paper presents a methodology to automate the transition from stakeholders' requests to the use case model. The methodology uses a natural language parser to parse stakeholders' requests according to various guidelines. The automation process is discussed with an example.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.425
Threshold uncertainty score0.557

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.193 · 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