Analysis of Current Trends in Software Aging: A Literature Survey
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
Software aging and architecture degradation are important areas in software quality assurance. Existing research in these areas has developed mitigation strategies for software aging, other researchers have analyzed strategies for identifying software aging. Regarding architectural degradation, current studies have designed techniques for reducing degradation. However, there appears to be a paucity of studies on the causes of software aging and architectural degradation. Insight into the causes of software aging and architectural degradation can provide a critical perspective and further strengthen the research endeavors on prevention techniques. Using recursive literature review (RLR) and Bootstrapping techniques, this research identifies and analyzes the causes of software aging and architecture degradation in software systems. We found that besides many other causes, architectural degradation is one of the key reasons that cause software aging and acts as a barrier to the sustainability of software architecture.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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