variED: an editor for collaborative, real-time feature modeling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Feature models are a helpful means to document, manage, maintain, and configure the variability of a software system, and thus are a core artifact in software product-line engineering. Due to the various purposes of feature models, they can be a cross-cutting concern in an organization, integrating technical and business aspects. For this reason, various stakeholders (e.g., developers and consultants) may get involved into modeling the features of a software product line. Currently, collaboration in such a scenario can only be done with face-to-face meetings or by combining single-user feature-model editors with additional communication and version-control systems. While face-to-face meetings are often costly and impractical, using version-control systems can cause merge conflicts and inconsistency within a model, due to the different intentions of the involved stakeholders. Advanced tools that solve these problems by enabling collaborative, real-time feature modeling, analogous to Google Docs or Overleaf for text editing, are missing. In this article, we build on a previous paper and describe (1) the extended formal foundations of collaborative, real-time feature modeling, (2) our conflict resolution algorithm in more detail, (3) proofs that our formalization converges and preserves causality as well as user intentions, (4) the implementation of our prototype, and (5) the results of an empirical evaluation to assess the prototype’s usability. Our contributions provide the basis for advancing existing feature-modeling tools and practices to support collaborative feature modeling. The results of our evaluation show that our prototype is considered helpful and valuable by 17 users, also indicating potential for extending our tool and opportunities for new research directions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.053 | 0.021 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".