MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312796785 · doi:10.1145/3510454.3516856

DScribe

2022· article· en· W4312796785 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Testing and Debugging Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDocumentationComputer scienceRedundancy (engineering)Unit testingArtifact (error)Technical documentationTemplateSoftware engineeringProgramming languageSoftwareOperating systemArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Test suites and documentation capture similar information despite serving distinct purposes. Such redundancy introduces the risk that the artifacts inconsistently capture specifications. We present DScribe, an approach that leverages the redundant information in tests and documentation to reduce the cost of creating them and the threat of inconsistencies. DScribe allows developers to define simple templates that jointly capture the structure to test and document a specification. They can then use these templates to generate consistent and checkable tests and documentation. By linking documentation to unit tests, DScribe ensures documentation accuracy as outdated documentation is flagged by failing tests. DScribe's template-based approach also enforces a uniform style throughout the artifacts. Hence, in addition to reducing developer effort, DScribe improves artifact quality by ensuring consistent content and style. Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUKp3MjMog

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.632
Threshold uncertainty score0.159

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.209 · 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