MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W99890835

Proceedings of the tenth international conference on Aspect-oriented software development companion

2011· article· en· W99890835 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Paulo Borba, Shigeru Chiba

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Engineering Techniques and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScope (computer science)Modularity (biology)Presentation (obstetrics)VisionSession (web analytics)Library scienceSoftware developmentComputer scienceSoftwareSoftware engineeringWorld Wide WebSociologyProgramming language
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is our great pleasure to welcome you to the 10th International Conference on Aspect-Oriented Software Development (AOSD), for the first time in Brazil. AOSD is the premier forum for presentation of research results and experience reports on software modularity, with an emphasis on modular structures that cut across traditional abstraction boundaries. The annual AOSD series started in 2002 in Enschede (The Netherlands), followed by Boston, Massachusetts (USA) in 2003, Lancaster (UK) in 2004, Chicago, Illinois (USA) in 2005, Bonn (Germany) in 2006, Vancouver (Canada) in 2007, Brussels (Belgium) in 2008, Charlottesville, Virginia (USA) in 2009, Rennes and Saint-Malo (France) in 2010, and Porto de Galinhas in 2011. This year's conference continues the tradition of its successful predecessors with Research and Industry Tracks, which bring together leading researchers and practitioners working in such fields as software engineering, programming languages, systems, and others. Besides these tracks, this year we have the satisfaction of introducing the Modularity Visions Track, which aims to think about modularity for the future, and hosting an ACM SIGPLAN Student Research Competition. Finally, to celebrate AOSD's 10th birthday, we have a special Retrospective on Modularity session and an outstanding group of keynote and invited speakers. In this way we hope to continue broadening its scope with respect to software developments activities, and start broadening the scope with respect to other advanced modularization mechanisms beyond aspects.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.124
Threshold uncertainty score0.414

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1240.078

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.201 · 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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware Engineering Techniques and PracticesFrench-language works237,207