MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2994143909 · doi:10.1109/icsme.2019.00099

Improving the Robustness and Efficiency of Continuous Integration and Deployment

2019· article· en· W2994143909 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Software Engineering Methodologies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesMitacsMcGill University
KeywordsSoftware deploymentCodebasePaceComputer scienceRobustness (evolution)Software engineeringDeliverableSoftwareDevOpsProcess managementSoftware developmentRisk analysis (engineering)Systems engineeringEngineeringOperating systemBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modern software is developed at a rapid pace. To sustain that rapid pace, organizations rely heavily on automated build, test, and release steps. To that end, Continuous Integration and Continuous Deployment (CI/CD) services take the incremental codebase changes that are produced by developers, compile them, link, and package them into software deliverables, verify their functionality, and deliver them to end users. While CI/CD processes provide mission-critical features, if they are misconfigured or poorly operated, the pace of development may be slowed or even halted. To prevent such issues, in this thesis, we set out to study and improve the robustness and efficiency of CI/CD. The thesis will include (1) conceptual contributions in the form of empirical studies of large samples of adopters of CI/CD tools to discover best practices and common limitations, as well as (2) technical contributions in the form of tools that support stakeholders to avoid common limitations (e.g., data misinterpretation issues, CI configuration mistakes).

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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.814
Threshold uncertainty score0.122

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.227 · 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