| Similarity | Rank | |
|---|---|---|
| scalable | 0.724 | 17522 |
| Robust | 0.713 | 48210 |
| well-structured | 0.711 | 73804 |
| consistent | 0.707 | 2763 |
| sophisticated | 0.704 | 4408 |
| cost-efficient | 0.703 | 44027 |
| integrated | 0.701 | 3039 |
| well-designed | 0.700 | 27304 |
| efficient | 0.698 | 2049 |
| resilient | 0.696 | 14875 |
| cost-effective | 0.696 | 8865 |
| adaptable | 0.693 | 18943 |
| best-in-class | 0.692 | 41489 |
| enhanced | 0.691 | 4461 |
| robustly | 0.686 | 65493 |
| rock-solid | 0.686 | 58600 |
| reliable | 0.683 | 2758 |
| high-performance | 0.681 | 19345 |
| flexible | 0.676 | 3454 |
| user-friendly | 0.676 | 15098 |
| underpinned | 0.675 | 39820 |
| extensible | 0.674 | 50716 |
| streamlined | 0.671 | 15282 |
| well-developed | 0.670 | 39848 |
| feature-rich | 0.668 | 57469 |