MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4236555516 · doi:10.1109/icse.2001.919189

Model processing tools in UML

2005· article· en· W4236555516 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Software Engineering. ICSE 2001 · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAssociation of Canadian Universities for Research in Astronomy
KeywordsClass diagramSequence diagramCommunication diagramComputer scienceUnified Modeling LanguageMerge (version control)Programming languageUML toolStory-driven modelingApplications of UMLActivity diagramInteraction overview diagramSystem context diagramState diagramTheoretical computer scienceDiagramFinite-state machineSoftwareInformation retrievalDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Unified Modeling Language (UML) provides several diagram types, viewing a system from different perspectives. In this research, we exploit the logical relationships between different UML models. We propose operations to compare, merge, slice and synthesize UML diagrams based on these relationships. In a formal demonstration, we show how statechart diagrams can be synthesized semi-automatically from a set of sequence diagrams using an interactive algorithm called MAS. We also demonstrate how a class diagram, annotated with pseudocode presentations of key operations, can be synthesized from sequence diagrams, and how class diagrams and sequence diagrams can be sliced against each other.

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 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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.677
Threshold uncertainty score0.608

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.237 · 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