MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415665797 · doi:10.1145/3772008.3772020

Report on the 13th ACM/IEEE International Workshop on Software Engineering for Systems-of-Systems and Software Ecosystems - SESoS@ICSE 2025

2025· article· en· W4415665797 on OpenAlexaff
Pablo Oliveira Antonino, Jakob Axelsson, Jason Jaskolka, Francesca Lonetti

Bibliographic record

VenueACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSystems Engineering Methodologies and Applications
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial software engineeringSoftware Engineering Process GroupSoftware developmentSoftwareSoftware requirementsSoftware peer reviewSoftware system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article reports on the results of the 13th ACM/IEEE International Workshop on Software Engineering for Systems-of-Systems and Software Ecosystems (SESoS 2025) in which researchers and practitioners discussed ideas and experiences on the research and practice for the development and evolution of complex softwareintensive systems, more specifically systems-of-systems (SoS) and software ecosystems (SECO). SESoS 2025 was co-located with the 47th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 2025). After over a decade running this workshop, the SESoS community is advancing on how to cope with the different dimensions that should be considered in the engineering of those classes of systems (i.e. technological, organizational, and social), and also is taking awareness of newer challenges for inclusiveness and sustainability. In addition, benchmarks for conducting research on the areas as well as approaches for investigating emerging domains (smart ecosystems) and non-functional requirements on those systems were pointed out as relevant challenges.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score0.508

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1520.063

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.240 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering NotesSame topicSystems Engineering Methodologies and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207