MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2966632201 · doi:10.1109/mise.2019.00022

Enabling Model-Driven Software Development Tools for the Internet of Things

2019· article· en· W2966632201 on OpenAlexaff
Karim Jahed, Juergen Dingel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicService-Oriented Architecture and Web Services
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTestbedKey (lock)SoftwareProcess (computing)Software engineeringWorld Wide WebOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The heterogeneity and complexity of Internet of Things (IoT) applications present new challenges to the software development process. Model-Driven Software Development (MDSD) is increasingly being recognized as a key paradigm in tackling many of these challenges, as evident by the emergence of a significant number of MDSD frameworks targeting IoT in the past couple of years. At the heart of IoT applications are embedded and realtime systems, a domain where model-driven development is well-established and many existing tools have a proven track record. Unfortunately, only a handful of these tools support out-of-the-box integration with the IoT. In this work, we discuss the different design and implementation decisions for enabling existing actor-oriented MDSD tools for the IoT. Moreover, we propose an integration approach based on the use of proxy actors and system interfaces. The approach offers seamless and flexible integration of external IoT devices into the user's model. We implement and evaluate our approach using the MDSD tool Papyrus for Realtime as a testbed.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations18
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicService-Oriented Architecture and Web ServicesFrench-language works237,207