MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Variability-aware Neo4j for Analyzing a Graphical Model of a Software Product Line

2023· article· en· W4389630081 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
TopicAdvanced Software Engineering Methodologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSoftware product lineProduct lineProduct (mathematics)SoftwareLine (geometry)Software engineeringSoftware developmentProgramming languageEngineeringManufacturing engineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Comprehensive analysis of a software product line (SPL) is expensive because the number of products to be analyzed is exponential in the number of the SPL’s features. To compensate, we analyze a model of the SPL rather than the source code, thereby reducing the size of the artifact under analysis. In this paper, we facilitate SPL analysis by lifting the Neo4j query engine to apply to an SPL model, so that a Neo4j query returns variability-aware results that cover all the SPL’s products. We used the lifted Neo4j to analyze five nontrivial SPLs (with respect to dataflows, control-flows, component interactions, etc.) and found that the overhead for returning variability-aware results for the full SPL, versus the results for just one product, ranges from 1.88% to 456%. In comparison to related work V-Soufflé (a lifted Datalog engine), lifted Neo4j is able to report complete path results whereas V-Soufflé reports only endpoints of paths. When both analyzers report the same results (e.g., endpoints of paths), lifted Neo4j is usually more efficient.

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)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.183
Threshold uncertainty score0.755

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.249 · 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