MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3215176293 · doi:10.1109/re51729.2021.00023

Automated Traceability for Domain Modelling Decisions Empowered by Artificial Intelligence

2021· article· en· W3215176293 on OpenAlexaff
Rijul Saini, Gunter Mussbacher, Jin Guo, Jörg Kienzle

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Engineering Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTraceabilityComputer scienceTRACE (psycholinguistics)Domain (mathematical analysis)TracingSet (abstract data type)Completeness (order theory)Artificial intelligenceDomain modelSoftware engineeringData scienceMachine learningDomain knowledgeProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Domain modelling abstracts real-world entities and their relationships in the form of class diagrams for a given domain problem space. Modellers often perform domain modelling to reduce the gap between understanding the problem description which expresses requirements in natural language and the concise interpretation of these requirements. However, the manual practice of domain modelling is both time-consuming and error-prone. These issues are further aggravated when problem descriptions are long, which makes it hard to trace modelling decisions from domain models to problem descriptions or vice-versa leading to completeness and conciseness issues. Automated support for tracing domain modelling decisions in both directions is thus advantageous. In this paper, we propose an automated approach that uses artificial intelligence techniques to extract domain models along with their trace links. We present a traceability information model to enable traceability of modelling decisions in both directions and provide its proof-of-concept in the form of a tool. The evaluation on a set of unseen problem descriptions shows that our approach is promising with an overall median F2 score of 82.04%. We conduct an exploratory user study to assess the benefits and limitations of our approach and present the lessons learned from this study.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.421
Threshold uncertainty score0.486

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.267 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware Engineering ResearchFrench-language works237,207