MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403935722 · doi:10.1145/3652620.3687807

Multi-step Iterative Automated Domain Modeling with Large Language Models

2024· article· en· W4403935722 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
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersMitacs
KeywordsComputer scienceDomain (mathematical analysis)Modeling languageProgramming languageSoftwareMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Domain modeling, which represents the concepts and relationships in a problem domain, is an essential part of software engineering. As large language models (LLMs) have recently exhibited remarkable ability in language understanding and generation, many approaches are designed to automate domain modeling with LLMs. However, these approaches usually formulate all input information to the LLM in a single step. Our previous single-step approach resulted in many missing modeling elements and advanced patterns. This paper introduces a novel framework designed to enhance fully automated domain model generation. The proposed multi-step automated domain modeling approach extracts model elements (e.g., classes, attributes, and relationships) from problem descriptions. The approach includes instructions and human knowledge in each step and uses an iterative process to identify complex patterns, repeatedly extracting the pattern from various instances and then synthesizing these extractions into a summarized overview. Furthermore, the framework incorporates a self-reflection mechanism. This mechanism assesses each generated model element, offering self-feedback for necessary modifications or removals, and integrates the domain model with the generated self-feedback. The proposed approach is assessed in experiments, comparing it with a baseline single-step approach from our earlier work. Experiments demonstrate a significant improvement over our earlier work, with a 22.71% increase in the F1-score for identifying classes, 75.18% for relationships, and a 10.39% improvement for identifying the player-role pattern, with comparable performance for attributes. Our approach, dataset, and evaluation provide valuable insight for future research in automated LLM-based domain modeling.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.513
Threshold uncertainty score0.500

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations13
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTopic ModelingFrench-language works237,207