MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156015672 · doi:10.1109/vlhcc.2008.4639061

Tool support for working with sets of source code entities

2008· article· en· W2156015672 on OpenAlexaff
Curtis Fraser, Chris Luce, Jamie Starke, Jonathan Sillito

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings/Proceedings -- IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Engineering Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSet (abstract data type)Code (set theory)Source codeKPI-driven code analysisCode reviewFocus (optics)Programming languageFace (sociological concept)Software engineeringStatic program analysisSoftwareSoftware development

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous research has identified several challenges that programmers face in answering questions about a code base. To explore ways to overcome those challenges, we have developed a prototypical programming tool called the Code Set tool. The tool allows programmers to work with sets of source code entities in novel ways, and this support allows programmers to more directly answer a range of questions about a code base. The tool also provides important contextual information for understanding the answers to those questions. The main focus of this paper is on the design and implementation of the Code Set tool. We also report on a small user study that serves as a first step in evaluating the effectiveness of the Code Set tool.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.064
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.064
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.010
Open science0.0050.007
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings/Proceedings -- IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric ComputingSame topicSoftware Engineering ResearchFrench-language works237,207