MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2743714280

Challenges and Research Directions for Successfully Applying MBE Tools in Practice

2017· article· en· W2743714280 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

VenueChalmers Research (Chalmers University of Technology) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicModel-Driven Software Engineering Techniques
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsViewpointsConstructiveUsabilityComputer scienceQuality (philosophy)Software engineeringCode (set theory)SoftwareEngineering managementManagement scienceSystems engineeringEngineeringHuman–computer interactionProgramming language
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Model Based Engineering aims to improve efficiency and effectiveness of software engineering. Success in industrial practice of MBE does not only depend on the modeling languages and constructive or analytical approaches, like code generation or model checking. It is also heavily influenced by the quality and, particularly, usability of the used tools. In this position paper, we discuss challenges experienced in applying MBE in practice both from academic as well as industrial viewpoints. Based on the research challenges, we discuss future research directions to improve the chances for the success of MBE in industrial practice.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.936
Threshold uncertainty score0.980

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.189
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.214 · 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