MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2541436993 · doi:10.1109/step.2002.1267625

Software product quality practices - quality measurement and evaluation using TL9000 and ISO/IEC 9126

2004· article· en· W2541436993 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSafety Systems Engineering in Autonomy
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoftware qualityQuality (philosophy)Software quality controlReliability engineeringProduct (mathematics)Software measurementSoftwareSoftware quality analystComputer scienceVerification and validationProcess (computing)Systems engineeringEngineeringManufacturing engineeringSoftware developmentOperations managementMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a combined, high-level quality view of TL9000 handbook and ISO/IEC 9126 in the process of defining, measuring, evaluating and finally achieving appropriate quality of user-centered software products. In its practices-related part this paper discusses the benefits, which the use of TL9000 product operational (in-the-field) quality measures can bring to setting up, measuring and evaluating the quality of the software product being developed, through its entire life cycle.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.773
Threshold uncertainty score0.872

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.170
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSafety Systems Engineering in AutonomyFrench-language works237,207