MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W70716443

Proceedings of the 4th international workshop on Predictor models in software engineering

2008· article· en· W70716443 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Boetticher Boetticher, Tom Ostrand

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Engineering Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIBMPresentation (obstetrics)Software engineeringComputer scienceEngineering managementEngineeringData science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is our great pleasure to welcome you to PROMISE 2008 - the 4th International Workshop on Predictor Models in Software Engineering. This year's workshop continues its tradition of being the premier forum for presentation of research results and experience reports in the area of predictor models applied to software engineering. The theme for this year's workshop is Bridging Research and Industry. Key questions for the workshop are -- How might PROMISE and other researchers better align with the realities of industry? -- How can industry make effective use of research ideas? In keeping with this theme, we have two keynote speakers from industry. Dr. Murray Cantor is an IBM Distinguished Engineer and the governance solutions lead on the IBM Rational Software CTO team. Mr. Chris Beal is a Sun Microsystems Senior Staff Engineer working with Solaris Revenue Product Engineering. We are pleased that PROMISE has become an international event. Our call for papers attracted submissions from Asia, Canada, Europe, and the United States. The program committee accepted over a dozen papers covering a variety of topics, including models related to fault prediction, effort estimation, and requirements engineering. One feature that sets this workshop apart from others is the PROMISE repository of software data sets that are publicly available for research purposes. The repository currently has 57 data sets and has grown at an average rate of 44% annually over the last 3.5 years.

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 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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.254
Threshold uncertainty score0.246

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations16
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware Engineering ResearchFrench-language works237,207