MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2895802172 · doi:10.1109/re.2018.00067

BloomingLeaf: A Formal Tool for Requirements Evolution Over Time

2018· article· en· W2895802172 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI-based Problem Solving and Planning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSemantics (computer science)Constraint (computer-aided design)ArchitectureConstraint satisfaction problemSoftware engineeringFormal semantics (linguistics)Artificial intelligenceProgramming languageTheoretical computer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our previous work presented the Evolving Intentions framework, which specified how evolving qualitative goal models can be modeled and analyzed. Recent improvements to the framework allow for precise semantics of goal relationships with propagation of both evidence for and evidence against a goal's satisfaction (as in Tropos), and enables evaluation of evolution with absolute time (in addition to relative time). The reasoning is expressed as a constraint satisfaction problem. In this paper, we present BloomingLeaf, a new web-based tool that implements the new semantics. We showcase how the implementation and architecture of BloomingLeaf can be used to answer time-based questions.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.950
Threshold uncertainty score0.367

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAI-based Problem Solving and PlanningFrench-language works237,207