WL++: a framework to build cross-platform mobile applications and RESTful back-ends
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
About one in two adults and one in four teens own a smart phone in North America and use it to access online information and services. This, ever increasing, demand for mobile applications has given rise to the need for tools and methods to systematically support the design and construction of these applications. Responding to this need, we have developed WL++, a code-generation environment for mobile-application development. Using this tool, developers can create application-specific diagrams of the application's logical model and annotate them with information about the user-interface widgets appropriate for interacting with the model elements. WL++ then produces a relational back-end for storing the model data, a set of RESTful APIs for accessing and updating the back-end, and a multi-platform mobile application that relies on the IBM Worklight framework to render, interact with and store the relevant data, through the chosen widgets and APIs. In addition, a general service monitors and records the usage of the APIs and the data exchange between the application and the back-end. In this paper, we describe the WL++ cross-mobile application generation framework and we illustrate its functionality with an example.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it