MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2883420415 · doi:10.1016/j.softx.2018.07.002

From source code to publication: Code Diary, an automatic documentation parser for SAS

2018· article· en· W2883420415 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

VenueSoftwareX · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSAS software applications and methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDocumentationComputer scienceInternal documentationSource codeCode (set theory)ParsingCode reviewProgramming languageSoftware documentationSoftwareSoftware engineeringStatic program analysisSoftware developmentSoftware development processSet (abstract data type)Software construction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Team members do not always review, or understand, all source code and the decisions that are made in it. Code developers and maintainers should have tools available to easily write, maintain, collate and share source code documentation. Institutional security demands often limit the types of software that researchers can install on their systems. It is, therefore, necessary to run a documentation tool natively within programs that are already installed. We developed Code Diary, an automatic documentation parser for SAS 9.3 and up. Code Diary provides a way to generate documentation natively from SAS source code.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.857
Threshold uncertainty score0.719

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.300 · 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