MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2480975271 · doi:10.1117/12.2234322

TMT common software update

2016· article· en· W2480975271 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Kim Gillies, Allan Brighton, Hanne Buur

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed and Parallel Computing Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOntario Ministry of Research and InnovationBritish Columbia Knowledge Development FundNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Astronomical Observatory of JapanAssociation of Canadian Universities for Research in AstronomyNational Institutes of Natural SciencesCalifornia Institute of TechnologyGordon and Betty Moore FoundationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceSoftware engineeringSoftwareSoftware constructionKey (lock)Software systemOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

TMT Common Software (CSW). CSW consists of software services and library code that is used by developers to create the subsystems and components that participate in the software system. CSW also defines the types of components that can be constructed and their functional roles in the software system. TMT CSW has recently passed its preliminary design review. The unique features of CSW include its use of multiple, open-source products as the basis for services, and an approach that works to reduce the amount of CSW-provided infrastructure code. Considerable prototyping was completed during this phase to mitigate risk with results that demonstrate the validity of this design approach and the selected service implementation products. This paper describes the latest design of TMT CSW, key features, and results from the prototyping effort.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.794
Threshold uncertainty score0.902

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicDistributed and Parallel Computing SystemsFrench-language works237,207