MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Cognitive Computing Methodology for Software Requirement Elicitation and Formal Specification

2022· article· en· W4366674475 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.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Computing and Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSoftware engineeringSoftware requirementsSoftware constructionSoftware requirements specificationRequirements elicitationFormal methodsRequirements analysisSoftware developmentFormal specificationSoftware systemSoftwareSystems engineeringProgramming languageEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Autonomous software requirement analysis and specifications is not only an ultimate goal of cognitive computing, but also a persistent challenge to theories and technologies of software engineering. A cognitive computing model is demanded to autonomously elicit and rigorously refine software requirements in order to generate a set of formal specifications. This paper presents a novel methodology for the design of a cognitive computing method for Software Requirement Elicitation and Specifications (SRES) based on the latest advances in software science and intelligent mathematics. SRES is implemented as an interactive system for capturing software requirements and generating formal specifications. The SRES methodology and experiments are demonstrated for solving real-world and complex software engineering problems enabled by cognitive computing theories underpinned by intelligent mathematics.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.963
Threshold uncertainty score0.493

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCognitive Computing and NetworksFrench-language works237,207