MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Delivering Better Projects on Time by Ensuring Requirements Quality Upfront

2018· article· en· W2886876310 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

VenueINCOSE International Symposium · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Engineering Research
Canadian institutionsTechnical University of Nova Scotia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTimelineComputer scienceCriticalityRisk analysis (engineering)AutomationQuality (philosophy)Domain (mathematical analysis)Process managementControl (management)Systems engineeringEngineeringBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract As systems and projects become ever more complex due to multiple and distinct stakeholders, growing user demands, stricter regulations, and rapidly increasing integration and automation, the number and criticality of requirements also grows rapidly. The number of errors due to poor, ambiguous, and inconsistent requirements are becoming unmanageable and are leading to dramatic costs overruns and systemic delays. This paper investigates the cause and effects that errors in natural language requirements have in a projects’ timelines and costs and how an emerging class of automated requirements analysis tools based on computational natural language processing can be harnessed by domain experts at the onset of the development lifecycle for them to retake control and ensure successful projects on time and on budget.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.283 · 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