Bibliographic record
Abstract
Computer Science often seems distant from its natural science cousins, especially software engineering which feels closer to sociology and psychology than to physics. Physical measurements are often rare in software engineering, except in a few niches. One such important niche is that of software energy consumption, green mining, green IT, and sustainable computing, which all fall under the umbrella of green software engineering. With the physical measurement of energy consumption comes all of the limitations of measurement and experimentation that exist in the natural sciences and engineering. Issues abound, from attribution of energy use, isolation of components, to replicable experiments. These get further complicated by cloud computing whereby systems are virtualized and attribution of resource usage is a serious issue. Thus in this work we discuss the current state of software energy consumption, and where will it go.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.099 | 0.208 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.038 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.024 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.029 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.004 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".