Proceedings of the 2010 ICSE Workshop on Sharing and Reusing Architectural Knowledge
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The SHARK workshop focuses on current and emerging methods, languages, notations, technologies and tools to create, extract, represent, share, use and re-use architectural knowledge. Architectural Knowledge (AK) is the integrated representation of the software architecture of a software-intensive system (or a family of systems), including the architectural design decisions, and the external context/environment. It is increasingly recognized as the means for architecture governance; it facilitates and supports collaboration and the transfer of expertise. Architectural knowledge has been established within the software architecture community as a self-contained research area in software architecture, and brought along some promising research directions. In this workshop we discuss the issues that lead to the application of architectural knowledge in research and industrial practice; ongoing research and new ideas to advance the field. In its four previous editions we examined: the state of the art and practice (2006), future challenges and trends (2007), architectural knowledge as perceived by different research communities, including requirements engineering, service-oriented computing and international standardization (2008), and the application, experimentation, specialization and use of architectural knowledge theory and approaches (2009). In this fifth SHARK edition we've asked the community to discuss and contribute on how to reorganize and codify the Body of Knowledge of the WICSA community (WICSA BOK). This is partially available through www.softwarearchitectureportal.org and www.wicsa.net, but it needs to be reorganized and unified. We see two broad objectives for this activity: (1) to codify the BOK in the way the potential users (i.e., the members of the architecture community) would like to see it; and (2) exploit Web 2.0 and social networking techniques to support AK sharing, and better reachability/usability (again) according to the actual needs of the community itself. SHARK contributions offer new ideas and R&D results to shape the next generation of the WICSA BOK (www.softwarearchitectureportal.org).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.033 | 0.010 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".