MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2998805281 · doi:10.1007/s10270-019-00732-1

Bridging proprietary modelling and open-source model management tools: the case of PTC Integrity Modeller and Epsilon

2019· article· en· W2998805281 on OpenAlexaff
Athanasios Zolotas, Horacio Hoyos Rodriguez, Stuart Hutchesson, Beatriz Sanchez Pina, Alan Grigg, Mole Li, Dimitrios S. Kolovos, Richard F. Paige

Bibliographic record

VenueSoftware & Systems Modeling · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicModel-Driven Software Engineering Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersInnovate UKEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilAerospace Technology Institute
KeywordsComputer scienceSoftware engineeringScripting languageBridge (graph theory)Unified Modeling LanguageBridging (networking)SoftwareProgramming languageComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While the majority of research on Model-Based Software Engineering revolves around open-source modelling frameworks such as the Eclipse Modelling Framework, the use of commercial and closed-source modelling tools such as RSA, Rhapsody, MagicDraw and Enterprise Architect appears to be the norm in industry at present. This technical gap can prohibit industrial users from reaping the benefits of state-of-the-art research-based tools in their practice. In this paper, we discuss an attempt to bridge a proprietary UML modelling tool (PTC Integrity Modeller), which is used for model-based development of safety-critical systems at Rolls-Royce, with an open-source family of languages for automated model management (Epsilon). We present the architecture of our solution, the challenges we encountered in developing it, and a performance comparison against the tool’s built-in scripting interface. In addition, we use the bridge in a real-world industrial case study that involves the coordination with other bridges between proprietary tools and Epsilon.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.092

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.009
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations14
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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