MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4255759827 · doi:10.1109/icse.2005.1553657

Human and social factors of software engineering

2005· article· en· W4255759827 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.

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

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings. 27th International Conference on Software Engineering, 2005. ICSE 2005. · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Innovations and Challenges
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSocial software engineeringSoftwareSoftware engineeringSoftware developmentSoftware constructionProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Workshop Summary: From its initial days in the sixties and seventies, the field of software engineering has to a large extent been concerned with the technological aspects of software as well as the formal procedures to be followed and artifacts to be produced in order to create high quality software. However, for some years we have seen a growing awareness that software engineering is a process involving humans, with all their particularities, working together in a social context: software projects rarely fail because of technical issues - their often fail because of human and communication problems. Psychological and sociological perspectives and theories have been used in order to understand concerns that may cause problems in the process of constructing and maintaining software, and further to develop means to cope with these issues. In particular among agile software development approaches, we have seen new and inventive approaches to solve some of the issues relating to behavior, group interaction and society. To make the social and human factors of software engineering more explicit, we aim among others to focus on psychological aspects of software developers and on the communication among software developers, between developers and users and other actors and stakeholders related to the software process. The formation of the social environment of the software developers, as well as its impact on productivity of the developments process and the quality of software is another pertinent issue. Another perspective is the role technological tools play in the construction of the social environment in which software engineers work. Thus, including and combining approaches of software engineering with theories of cognitive science, psychology and social science, the workshop will try to systematize the relevant factors, establishing a common ground for further studies on the topic. In particular, the workshop looks at software engineering from the perspectives of agile methods and communication theory in order to point out solutions and conditions for human-centered software engineering processes. Typical topics to be investigated are practices for knowledge dissemination in software engineering teams, knowledge reuse in software engineering projects, interactions in software development processes, social software approaches, decision making processes in software development and communication architectures for human-centric collaboration support of developer teams. In more general terms, we aim to provide a forum for researchers and practitioners to discuss the latest developments in the areas of cognitive & social science approaches to software development problems, knowledge engineering and software engineering approaches, and how these interact to create a human centered software development process.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.242 · 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