MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2919910741 · doi:10.1016/j.jss.2019.110486

A machine-learning based ensemble method for anti-patterns detection

2019· preprint· en· W2919910741 on OpenAlexafffund
Antoine Barbez, Foutse Khomh, Yann‐Gaël Guéhéneuc

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Systems and Software · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Engineering Research
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsComputer scienceEnsemble learningMachine learningFalse positive paradoxMaintainabilityArtificial intelligenceAggregate (composite)Feature (linguistics)Source codeProgram comprehensionJavaClass (philosophy)Data miningCode (set theory)Pattern recognition (psychology)SoftwareSet (abstract data type)Software system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.829
Threshold uncertainty score0.859

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Systems and SoftwareSame topicSoftware Engineering ResearchFrench-language works237,207