MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2528713103 · doi:10.17706/jsw.11.2.201-211

Investigating Vincenti Engineering Principles in Support to the Auditing of Measurement Processes in Agile Organizations

2015· article· en· W2528713103 on OpenAlexaff
Malik Qasaimeh, Alain Abran, Ammar Abdallah, Raad S. Al‐Qassas

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Software · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Engineering Techniques and Practices
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieureUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceAgile software developmentAuditSoftware engineeringProcess managementAccounting

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ISO 9001 impacts the entire range of software life cycle activities, including software planning, software requirements gathering and analysis, software construction, the software life cycle traceability process, and the measurement process To address all these activities, software organizations that need to become ISO 9001 certified find themselves in a position where they need to develop a myriad of tools and techniques to demonstrate that their software processes are in conformity with this ISO quality standard. A common methodology is to have in place a certification team (i.e. software analysts) responsible for understanding which ISO 9001 clauses impact the organization's business processes, including software process activities. This team must also assess the development team process to demonstrate that the software products are being developed according to ISO 9001 requirements: in essence, this means providing documented evidence that clarifies how and when a particular design decision has been implemented. The collection of evidences constitutes a very important foundation on which the auditors base their audit results and conclusion.

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)0.063
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.147
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.333

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0630.147
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.007
Scholarly communication0.0140.010
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.262
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

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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of SoftwareSame topicSoftware Engineering Techniques and PracticesFrench-language works237,207