MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4230056407 · doi:10.1145/634636.586103

STEP

2002· article· en· W4230056407 on OpenAlexaff
Rhodes Brown, Karel Driesen, David Eng, Laurie Hendren, John Bagterp Jørgensen, Clark Verbrugge, Qin Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAlgorithms and Data Compression
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTracingCompilerProgramming languageJavaTRACE (psycholinguistics)ReuseInterface (matter)Software engineeringEncoding (memory)Set (abstract data type)Operating systemArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditional tracing systems are often limited to recording a fixed set of basic program events. This limitation can frustrate an application or compiler developer who is trying to understand and characterize the complex behavior of software systems such as a Java program running on a Java Virtual Machine. In the past, many developers have resorted to specialized tracing systems that target a particular type of program event. This approach often results in an obscure and poorly documented encoding format which can limit the reuse and sharing of potentially valuable information. To address this problem, we present STEP, a system designed to provide profiler developers with a standard method for encoding general program trace data in a flexible and compact format. The system consists of a trace data definition language along with a compiler and an architecture that simplifies the client interface by encapsulating the details of encoding and interpretation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.134
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1340.121

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering NotesSame topicAlgorithms and Data CompressionFrench-language works237,207