MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Adaptação de componentes de software para o desenvolvimento de sistemas confiaveis

2001· dissertation· pt· W2273556975 on OpenAlex
Gerson Mizuta Weiss

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

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languagept
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Software Engineering Methodologies
Canadian institutionsAdidas (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComponent-based software engineeringComputer scienceSoftware developmentSoftware systemSoftware constructionSoftware engineeringSoftwareOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The component-based software deveiopment aims at the reduction of the development costs through the composition of reusable software components. Usually a software component must be adapted in order to agree with the design of the system. The adaptation of software components is a manner to increase the reuse of components and help developers in the composition of third-party software components. This work presents a software component adaptation technique based on computational reflection that makes transparent adaptations, where the client of the adapted component does not have knowledge about the adaptations made. Besides that, the technique does not need to acess the component's source code and it is not necessary the presence of an executive system that controls the system's execution. The technique proposed is implemented to adapt software components developed in Java. The technique was used to add non-functional properties, such as fault tolerance, security and exception handling, to software components.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.259 · 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