MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W566444363

Feature Model Mining

2008· dissertation· en· W566444363 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2008
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Mining Algorithms and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Waterloo
KeywordsFeature (linguistics)Computer scienceData miningArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>Software systems have grown larger and more complex in recent years. Generative software development strives to automate software development from a systems family by generating implementations using domain-specific languages. In current practice, specifying domain-specific languages is a manual task requiring expert analysis of multiple information sources. Furthermore, the concepts and relations represented in a language are grown through its usage. Keeping the language consistent with its usage is a time-consuming process requiring manual comparison between the language instances and its language specification. Feature model mining addresses these issues by synthesizing a representative model bottom-up from a sample set of instances called configurations.</p>
\n
\n<p>This thesis presents a mining algorithm that reverse-engineers a probabilistic feature model from a set of individual configurations. A configuration consists of a list of features that are defined as system properties that a stakeholder is interested in. Probabilistic expressions are retrieved from the sample configurations through the use of conjunctive and disjunctive association rule mining. These expressions are used to construct a probabilistic feature model. </p>
\n
\n
\n<p>The mined feature model consists of a hierarchy of features, a set of additional hard constraints and soft constraints. The hierarchy describes the dependencies and alternative relations exhibited among the features. The additional hard constraints are a set of propositional formulas which must be satisfied in a legal configuration. Soft constraints describe likely defaults or common patterns.</p>
\n
\n
\n<p>Systems families are often realized using object-oriented frameworks that provide reusable designs for constructing a family of applications. The mining algorithm is evaluated on a set of applications to retrieve a metamodel of the Java Applet framework. The feature model is then applied to the development of framework-specific modeling languages (FSMLs). FSMLs are domain-specific languages that model the framework-provided concepts and their rules for development.</p>
\n
\n
\n<p>The work presented in this thesis provides the foundation for further research in feature model mining. The strengths and weaknesses of the algorithm are analyzed and the thesis concludes with a discussion of possible extensions.</p>

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.964
Threshold uncertainty score0.868

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.195 · 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