MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092326336

ACM SIGSOFT Empirical Standards.

2020· article· en· W3092326336 on OpenAlexaff
Paul Ralph, Sebastian Baltes, Domenico Bianculli, Yvonne Dittrich, Michael Felderer, Robert Feldt, Antonio Filieri, Carlo A. Furia, Daniel Graziotin, Pinjia He, Rashina Hoda, Natália Juristo, Barbara Kitchenham, Romain Robbes, Daniel Méndez, Jefferson Seide Molléri, Diomidis Spinellis, Miroslaw Staron, Klaas-Jan Stol, Damian A. Tamburri, Marco Torchiano, Christoph Treude, Burak Turhan, Sira Vegas

Bibliographic record

VenueSpiral (Imperial College London) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Engineering Research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpirical researchComputer scienceQuality (philosophy)SoftwareData scienceEngineering managementEngineeringMathematicsStatistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Empirical Standards are brief public document that communicate expectations for a specific kind of study (e.g. a questionnaire survey). The ACM SIGSOFT Paper and Peer Review Quality Initiative generated empirical standards for common research methods in software engineering. These living documents, which should be continuously revised to reflect evolving consensus around research best practices, can be used to make peer review more transparent, structured, harmonious and fair.

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 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)0.013
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.170
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations36
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpiral (Imperial College London)Same topicSoftware Engineering ResearchFrench-language works237,207