MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2255209176 · doi:10.1287/serv.2015.0114

Software Evolution in Web-Service Ecosystems: A Game-Theoretic Model

2016· article· en· W2255209176 on OpenAlexafffund
Marios Fokaefs, Eleni Stroulia

Bibliographic record

VenueService Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicDigital Platforms and Economics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceSoftwareGame theoryWeb serviceService (business)World Wide WebBusinessSoftware engineeringMarketingMicroeconomicsOperating systemEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Service orientation is the prevalent paradigm for modular distributed systems, giving rise to service ecosystems defined by software dependencies, which, at the same time, carry business and economic implications. And as software evolves, so do the business relationships among the ecosystem participants, with corresponding economic impact. Therefore, a more comprehensive model of software evolution is necessary in this context, to support the decision-making processes of the ecosystem participants. In this work, we view the ecosystem as a market environment, with providers offering competing services and developing these services to attract more clients by better satisfying their requirements. Based on an economic model for calculating the costs and values associated with service evolution, we develop a game-theoretic model to capture the interactions between providers and clients and support the providers’ decision-making process. We demonstrate the use of our model with a realistic example of a cloud-services ecosystem.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueService ScienceSame topicDigital Platforms and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207