Grey Wolf Algorithm for Requirements Prioritization
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
Requirement prioritization is one of the most important approach in the process of requirement engineering due to use it in order to prioritize the execution sort of requirements with taking into account the viewpoints of stakeholders. Thus, in this study, grey wolf optimization (GWO) algorithm is applied in order to prioritize the requirements of a software project. GWO imitates the hunting behavior of grey wolves in nature. Which distinct from others that it has dominant leadership hierarchy which contains four main types; alpha, beta delta and omega wolves. In this paper, a proposed algorithm is presented to prioritize the requirements into ordered list. Furthermore, it is compared and evaluated with analytical hierarchy process (AHP) technique in terms of average running time and dataset size. The findings display that the RP-GWO performs better than AHP mechanism by approximately (30%).
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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