Software Reusability Estimation based on Dynamic Metrics using Soft Computing Techniques
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dynamic metrics capture the run time features of object-oriented languages, i.e., runtime polymorphism, dynamic binding, etc., that are not covered by static metrics. Therefore, in this paper, we derived a new approach to measuring the software reusability of a design pattern based on dynamic metrics. To achieve this, the authors proposed a model based on five parameters, i.e., polymorphism, inheritance, number of children, coupling, and complexity, to measure the reusability factor by using various soft computing techniques, i.e., Fuzzy, Neural Network, and Neuro-Fuzzy. Further, we also compared the proposed model with four existing machine learning algorithms. Lastly, we found that the proposed model using the neuro-fuzzy technique is trained well and predicts well with MAE (Mean absolute error) 0.003 and RMSE (Root mean square error) 0.009 based on dynamic metrics. Hence, it is concluded that dynamic metrics are a better predictor of the reusability factor than static metrics.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it