MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2913702370

Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Generative programming and component engineering

2006· article· en· W2913702370 on OpenAlexaff
Stan Jarzabek, Douglas C. Schmidt, Todd L. Veldhuizen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Software Engineering Methodologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSoftware engineeringGenerative grammarProgrammerSoftware developmentComponent (thermodynamics)SoftwareEngineering managementProgramming languageEngineeringArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is our great pleasure to welcome you to GPCE'06, a premier forum for presenting and discussing research results and industry strength technologies in areas of generative programming and component engineering. Generative programming brings unique, useful engineering qualities that are missing in conventional programming approaches-especially when designing generic, adaptable and maintainable software. Generative programming is one of the few emerging technologies that can bridge the gap between software architecture and code.GPCE has traditionally brought together researchers and practitioners interested in a wide array of issues related to automation of software development, better control over software complexity, and improvement of programmer productivity in general. GPCE has been also an environment for cross-fertilization between the programming language and software engineering research communities. It was our intention to continue these major GPCE threads and traditions. This year's GPCE is co-located with OOPSLA, which will ensure the fusion of ideas pertinent to software development, both theory and practice.We received 85 papers from around the world. Many papers were of very high quality, as evidenced by the strength of the GPCE'06 technical program. The program committee accepted 30 papers covering a wide spectrum of topics. The tutorial program presenting industry strength technologies shows the maturity of generative programming, and is targeted at practitioners as well as researchers. Paper presentations, complemented by seven tutorials, four workshops, and two keynotes, form a conference program that we hope all participants will find exciting and worth attending.

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 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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score0.204

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Software Engineering MethodologiesFrench-language works237,207