MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160708296 · doi:10.1109/ms.2007.155

A Software Chasm: Software Engineering and Scientific Computing

2007· article· en· W2160708296 on OpenAlexaff
Diane Kelly

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Software · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Software Engineering Methodologies
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial software engineeringSoftware Engineering Process GroupSoftware engineeringSoftware developmentSoftware requirementsSoftware constructionSoftware systemSoftwareSoftware peer reviewComputer sciencePersonal software processSoftware deploymentEngineering managementSystems engineeringEngineeringOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Some time ago, a chasm opened between the scientific-computing community and the software engineering community. Originally, computing meant scientific computing. Today, science and engineering applications are at the heart of software systems such as environmental monitoring systems, rocket guidance systems, safety studies for nuclear stations, and fuel injection systems. Failures of such health-, mission-, or safety-related systems have served as examples to promote the use of software engineering best practices. Yet, the bulk of the software engineering community's research is on anything but scientific-application software. This chasm has many possible causes. In this article, we look at the impact of one particular contributor in industry.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.048
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.048
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.010
Science and technology studies0.0040.029
Scholarly communication0.0150.039
Open science0.0020.011
Research integrity0.0090.018
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.246 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods
GenreCommentary

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

Citations94
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE SoftwareSame topicAdvanced Software Engineering MethodologiesFrench-language works237,207