MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6989798918

Case study of feature based awareness in a commercial software team and implications for the design of collaborative tools

2010· dissertation· en· W6989798918 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
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

VenueUVic’s Research and Learning Repository (University of Victoria) · 2010
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicUsability and User Interface Design
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtifact (error)IBMSoftware developmentFeature (linguistics)SoftwareProcess (computing)Software development processCode (set theory)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Software development is a process in continuous evolution. This characteristic implies also continuous changes in the functionality of the system under development. Some of these changes may cause problems when they are not properly and timely propagated to the project members. The aim of our research is to obtain a good understanding of problems caused by the lack of awareness of changes to features during a distributed software development project, to identify information and artifact repositories used by contributors, and then to draw the requirements of an awareness mechanism to tackle the awareness problem. In order to accomplish our research goals. we conducted a four month long case study at IBM Ottawa Software Lab. which we observed the collaboration patterns of a multi-site development project team.
\nOur findings helped us identify the most important communication media that support development. In particular, we observed that the 3-1% of communication was by phone and via face-to-face interactions. and email was mostly used to alert contributors about changes to features. We also found that changes were not properly and timely propagated due to different corporate cultures of the project teams. Finally, we found that a high volume of communication makes developers prone to overlook important information that can lead to the generation of errors during development., These findings led us to believe that miscommunication and non-timely communication of changes related to feature development caused the release of code that created failures in stable builds.
\nTo address this problem. we developed the concept of a relationship to link developers to features. Using this concept, we have designed a feature-based Awareness Mechanism System to collect information, create relationships and deliver awareness information to the contributors involved in the implementation of a feature.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.248
Threshold uncertainty score0.653

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.266 · 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