Continuous Deployment Transitions at Scale
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Predictable, rapid, and data-driven feature rollout; lightning-fast; and automated fix deployment are some of the benefits most large software organizations worldwide are striving for. In the process, they are transitioning toward the use of continuous deployment practices. Continuous deployment enables companies to make hundreds or thousands of software changes to live computing infrastructure every day while maintaining service to millions of customers. Such ultra-fast changes create a new reality in software development. Over the past four years, the Continuous Deployment Summit, hosted at Facebook, Netflix, Google, and Twitter has been held. Representatives from companies like Cisco, Facebook, Google, IBM, Microsoft, Netflix, and Twitter have shared the triumphs and struggles of their transition to continuous deployment practices—each year the companies press on, getting ever faster. In this chapter, the authors share the common strategies and practices used by continuous deployment pioneers and adopted by newcomers as they transition and use continuous deployment practices at scale.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it