MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2985253063 · doi:10.1145/3356773.3356806

SST'19 - Software and Systems Traceability

2019· article· en· W2985253063 on OpenAlexaff
Jan-Philipp Steghöfer, Nan Niu, Jin Guo, Anas Mahmoud

Bibliographic record

VenueACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Engineering Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTraceabilityRequirements traceabilitySoftware engineeringComputer scienceContext (archaeology)Software developmentSoftware systemChange impact analysisEvent (particle physics)Systems engineeringSoftwareEngineeringRequirementProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traceability is the ability to relate di erent artifacts during the development and operation of a system to each other. It enables program comprehension, change impact analysis, and facilitates the cooperation of engineers from di erent disciplines. The 10th International Workshop on Software and Systems Traceability (former International Workshop on Traceability in Emerging Forms of Software Engineering, TEFSE), explored the role and impact of traceability in modern software and systems development. The event brought together researchers and practitioners to examine the challenges of recovering, maintaining, and utilizing traceability for the myriad forms of software and systems engineering artifacts. SST'19 was a highly interactive working event focused on discussing the main problems related to software traceability in particular in the context of opportunities and challenges posed by the recent progress in Arti cial Intelligence techniques and proposing possible solutions for such problems.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0040.006
Scholarly communication0.0110.010
Open science0.0050.008
Research integrity0.0080.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0320.025

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.226 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering NotesSame topicSoftware Engineering ResearchFrench-language works237,207