MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2770941931 · doi:10.1186/s13174-017-0069-9

Free and open source software development: the end of the teenage years

2017· article· en· W2770941931 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
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

VenueJournal of Internet Services and Applications · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOpen Source Software Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidade Tecnológica Federal do ParanáUniversidade Federal do Rio Grande do NorteUniversity at AlbanyNational University of Computer and Emerging SciencesUniversidade Federal do ParáUniversidade Federal de Santa MariaTurun YliopistoQueen's UniversityTechnische Universiteit DelftSyracuse UniversityUniversity of LimerickScience Foundation IrelandLunds UniversitetUniversität PassauUniversidade Federal do PiauíUniversità degli Studi di CagliariNational University of Defense TechnologyMcGill UniversityUniversity of VictoriaUniversidade Estadual da Paraíba
KeywordsComputer scienceOpen sourceOpen source softwareSoftwareComputer ApplicationsSoftware engineeringOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thematic series of the Journal of Internet Services and Applications (JISA) presents a collection of articles around the broad topic of the development of Free and Open Source Software (FOSS). This series illustrates the diversity of topics that are related to FOSS – we received submissions from many different areas; for example, dealing with communication and coordination within FOSS communities, licensing, adoption of Kanban in FOSS settings, and the use of an open model in the editorship of standards. Moreover, the studies presented were conducted using data collected from different\nsources, including software repositories, mailing lists, interviews, questionnaires and field notes, and were analysed using quantitative and qualitative methods, including\ncase studies and action research methods.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.712
Threshold uncertainty score0.802

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0040.002
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.246 · 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