MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

On the Prospects and Concerns of Pattern-Oriented Web Engineering

2010· book-chapter· en· W2490124202 on OpenAlex

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

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2010
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWeb Applications and Data Management
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeb engineeringWeb modelingComputer scienceSelection (genetic algorithm)Context (archaeology)Web designQuality (philosophy)Process (computing)Perspective (graphical)Web applicationWeb standardsEngineering design processEngineeringWorld Wide WebWeb serviceWeb intelligenceArtificial intelligenceGeographyMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this chapter, the development and evolution of Web Applications is viewed from an engineering perspective that relies on and accommodates the knowledge inherent in patterns. It proposes an approach in the direction of building a foundation for pattern-oriented Web Engineering. For that, a methodology for pattern-oriented Web Engineering, namely POWEM, is described. The steps of POWEM include selection of a suitable development process model, construction of a semiotic quality model, namely PoQ, and selection and mapping of suitable patterns to quality attributes in PoQ. To support decision making and to place POWEM in context, the feasibility issues involved in each step are discussed. For the sake of is illustration, the use of patterns during the design phase of a Web Application are highlighted. Finally, some directions for future research, including those for Web Engineering education and Social Web Applications, are given.

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)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.541

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.215
Teacher spread0.204 · 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