MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2244339006 · doi:10.4230/dagsemproc.10431.2

10431 Report – Software Engineering for Self-Adaptive Systems

2011· article· en· W2244339006 on OpenAlex
Rogério de Lemos, Holger Giese, Hausi Müller, Mary Shaw

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

VenueDROPS (Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Software Engineering Methodologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSoftware engineeringSoftware systemCover (algebra)SoftwareAdaptive systemResource (disambiguation)Software developmentDistributed computingEngineeringOperating systemArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Softwares ability to adapt at run-time to changing user needs, system intrusions or faults, changing operational environment, and resource variability has been proposed as a means to cope with the complexity of todays software- intensive systems. Such self-adaptive systems can configure and reconfigure themselves, augment their functionality, continually optimise themselves, protect themselves, and re- cover themselves, while keeping most of their complexity hidden from the user and administrator. In this paper, we present research road map for software engineering of self- adaptive systems focusing on four views, which we identify as essential: design spaces, verification and validation, processes, and decentralisation.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.601
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.209 · 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