MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2547521629

Adaptive Practice on Software Reliability Based on IEEE Std. 1633 in Frequent Requirement Modifications.

2010· article· en· W2547521629 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer and Information Science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Reliability and Analysis Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceReliability engineeringSoftware developmentSoftware requirementsSoftware qualityReliability (semiconductor)Software constructionSoftwareSoftware reliability testingSoftware development processVerification and validationAvionics softwareSoftware engineeringSoftware sizingSoftware release life cycleSoftware deploymentOperating systemEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates an adaptive practice on software reliability in frequent requirement modifications. According to the conventional software development processes, software requirements are specified and locked at the early stage of software life cycle. As a project progresses, the requirements can be added and modified to reflect customers needs. However, it can be an obstacle to activities for software reliability engineered process if they are changed frequently. Software is developed in accordance with the requirements. If the frequency of software requirement modifications is high, the software is liable to be error-prone. It also makes the software reliability estimation activities reconfigurable. Therefore, we propose an adaptive approach to estimate software reliability which is based on IEEE Std. 1633.We show why the adaptive approach is necessary when software requirements are changed frequently through a case study.

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)0.003
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.815
Threshold uncertainty score0.616

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.008
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.281 · 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