MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4255626391 · doi:10.1109/bigdse.2015.10

Big Picture of Big Data Software Engineering: With Example Research Challenges

2015· article· en· W4255626391 on OpenAlex
Nazim H. Madhavji, Andriy Miranskyy, Kostas Kontogiannis

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBig Data and Business Intelligence
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBig dataComputer scienceData scienceSoftware analyticsPerspective (graphical)Software developmentContext (archaeology)Data modelingField (mathematics)SoftwareAnalyticsSoftware engineeringSoftware development processData miningArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the rapidly growing field of Big Data, we note that a disproportionately larger amount of effort is being invested in infrastructure development and data analytics in comparison to applications software development -- approximately a 80:20 ratio. This prompted us to create a context model of Big Data Software Engineering (BDSE) containing various elements -- such as development practice, Big Data systems, corporate decision-making, and research -- and their relationships. The model puts into perspective where various types of stakeholders fit in. From the research perspective, we describe example challenges in BDSE, specifically requirements, architectures, and testing and maintenance.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.747
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.612
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Quick stats

Citations32
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBig Data and Business IntelligenceFrench-language works237,207