MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162836425 · doi:10.1109/issre.1991.145373

Metrics evaluation of software reliability growth models

2002· article· en· W2162836425 on OpenAlexaff
Fts Chan, P. Dasiewicz, R.E. Seviora

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Reliability and Analysis Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetric (unit)Reliability (semiconductor)Computer scienceSoftware qualitySoftware metricField (mathematics)SoftwareReliability engineeringPredictive validityTerm (time)Data miningMachine learningSoftware developmentStatisticsMathematicsEngineeringProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Numerous software reliability growth models have been proposed. The authors present three metrics which have been helpful in assessing the applicability and predictive validity of these models. These metrics are the relative fitting error metric, the short term predictive validity metric and the long term predictive validity metric. The application of these three metrics is illustrated on estimation of field reliability of telecommunication switching systems.>

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.098
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.098
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations6
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware Reliability and Analysis ResearchFrench-language works237,207