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
Computing systems form the backbone of many areas in our society, from manufacturing to traffic control, healthcare, and financial systems. When software plays a vital role in the design, construction, and operation, these systems are referred to as software-intensive systems. Self-adaptation equips a software-intensive system with a feedback loop that either automates tasks that otherwise need to be performed by human operators or deals with uncertain conditions. Such feedback loops have found their way to a variety of practical applications; typical examples are an elastic cloud to adapt computing resources and automated server management to respond quickly to business needs. To gain insight into the motivations for applying self-adaptation in practice, the problems solved using self-adaptation and how these problems are solved, and the difficulties and risks that industry faces in adopting self-adaptation, we performed a large-scale survey. We received 184 valid responses from practitioners spread over 21 countries. Based on the analysis of the survey data, we provide an empirically grounded overview the of state of the practice in the application of self-adaptation. From that, we derive insights for researchers to check their current research with industrial needs, and for practitioners to compare their current practice in applying self-adaptation. These insights also provide opportunities for applying self-adaptation in practice and pave the way for future industry-research collaborations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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