MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W28510325 · doi:10.1002/anie.201702497

Understanding Decision-Oriented Variability Modelling.

2008· article· en· W28510325 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Deepak Dhungana, Paul Grünbacher

Bibliographic record

VenueSoftware Product Lines · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Software Engineering Methodologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAssociation Nationale de la Recherche et de la TechnologieAgence Nationale de la RechercheDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsComputer scienceSemantics (computer science)Domain (mathematical analysis)Data scienceSoftware engineeringDecision support systemManagement scienceData miningEngineeringProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Researchers and practitioners have been developing a wide range of techniques and tools to model and manage variability as a response to the heterogeneity of application areas and the diversity of implementation practices in different domains. In our own research we have been developing a tool-supported approach to decision-oriented variability modelling, which is highly customizable to domain-specific needs. In the past we have reported on our experiences on using the approach and its benefits in diverse industrial contexts. In this paper we present a more formal description of our approach and define the execution semantics of decisionoriented variability models. 1.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.167
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.128 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSoftware Product LinesSame topicAdvanced Software Engineering MethodologiesFrench-language works237,207