MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145491441 · doi:10.5555/2337223.2337490

Bridging the divide between software developers and operators using logs

2012· article· en· W2145491441 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
TopicSoftware System Performance and Reliability
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceBridging (networking)Software engineeringSoftware developmentBridge (graph theory)SoftwareSoftware qualityData scienceComputer securityProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract—There is a growing gap between the software development and operation worlds. Software developers rarely divulge development knowledge about the software to opera-tors, while operators rarely communicate field knowledge to developers. To improve the quality and reduce the operational cost of large-scale software systems, bridging the gap between these two worlds is essential. This thesis proposes the use of logs as mechanism to bridge the gap between these two worlds. Logs are messages generated from statements inserted by developers in the source code and are often used by operators for monitoring the field operation of a system. However, the rich knowledge in logs has not yet been fully used because of their non-structured nature, their large scale, and the use of the ad hoc log analysis techniques. Through case studies on large commercial and open source systems, we plan to demonstrate the value of logs as a tool to support developers and operators. I.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.401
Threshold uncertainty score0.291

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.232 · 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