Using Web services choreography to support an extensible and flexible system development process
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Systems Engineering (SE) controls a complex environment consisting of various collaborative subsystems. Each subsystem demands different kind of requirements and follows a specific strategy for its development process. Unifying and harmonizing the development process of all collaborative subsystems towards achieving the ultimate integrated system is one of the main challenges of SE. This work introduces a new approach towards having a generic SE unified process applicable to various environments. We suggest a service-oriented framework for SE process implemented using Web Services, and describe the process scenario in a machine-friendly abstract layer over the Development Process. This description layer choreographs collaborative subsystems and is implemented by a Web Services Choreography Description Language (WSCDL). It also covers Interface Management concerns of SE. In such an environment, as long as all services follow a unique framework for the SE process such as the one specified by the International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE), each phase of the process would then be an anonymous service implemented by a different vendor. As the result, an organization could easily customize its own specific development environment by editing this choreography layer according to its specific development policies, and then tailor its own desired development environment by choosing and integrating various services available on the Web. Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 45-01, page: 0351. Thesis (M.Sc.)--University of Windsor (Canada), 2006.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it