MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963633893 · doi:10.1007/s10270-019-00746-9

Contents for a Model-Based Software Engineering Body of Knowledge

2019· article· en· W2963633893 on OpenAlexaff
Loli Burgueño, Federico Ciccozzi, Michalis Famelis, Gerti Kappel, Leen Lambers, Sébastien Mosser, Richard F. Paige, Alfonso Pierantonio, Arend Rensink, Rick Salay, Gabriele Taentzer, Antonio Vallecillo, Manuel Wimmer

Bibliographic record

VenueSoftware & Systems Modeling · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicModel-Driven Software Engineering Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMcMaster UniversityUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversité de Montréal
FundersMälardalens högskola
KeywordsComputer scienceScope (computer science)CurriculumSet (abstract data type)Software engineeringBody of knowledgeSoftwareFoundation (evidence)Software developmentKnowledge managementPedagogyProgramming languageSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although Model-Based Software Engineering (MBE) is a widely accepted Software Engineering (SE) discipline, no agreed-upon core set of concepts and practices (i.e., a Body of Knowledge) has been defined for it yet. With the goals of characterizing the contents of the MBE discipline, promoting a global consistent view of it, clarifying its scope with regard to other SE disciplines, and defining a foundation for the development of educational curricula on MBE, this paper proposes the contents for a Body of Knowledge for MBE. We also describe the methodology that we have used to come up with the proposed list of contents, as well as the results of a survey study that we conducted to sound out the opinion of the community on the importance of the proposed topics and their level of coverage in the existing SE curricula.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0090.011
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.005

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations42
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSoftware & Systems ModelingSame topicModel-Driven Software Engineering TechniquesFrench-language works237,207