MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401414416 · doi:10.1109/ms.2024.3440190

A State-of-the-Practice Release-Readiness Checklist for Generative AI-Based Software Products: A Gray Literature Survey

2024· article· en· W4401414416 on OpenAlexaff
Harsh Patel, Dominique Boucher, Emad Fallahzadeh, Ahmed E. Hassan, Bram Adams

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Software · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Engineering Research
Canadian institutionsBank of CanadaNational Bank of CanadaBusiness Development Bank of CanadaQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoftware engineeringChecklistComputer scienceSoftware peer reviewSoftware developmentSoftwareGenerative grammarState (computer science)Software release life cycleSoftware qualityEngineering managementSoftware constructionEngineeringProgramming languageArtificial intelligencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate the complexities of integrating large language models (LLMs) into software products, focusing on challenges encountered for determining their readiness for release. Our review of gray literature identifies common challenges in deploying LLMs, from pretraining and fine-tuning to user experience considerations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.051
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.176
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score0.271

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0510.176
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0190.010
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0080.011
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designObservational
DomainMethods
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE SoftwareSame topicSoftware Engineering ResearchFrench-language works237,207