MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965382524 · doi:10.1016/j.entcs.2005.09.028

Type Theory and Language Constructs for Objects with States

2006· article· en· W1965382524 on OpenAlexaff
Huichun Xu, S. Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLogic, programming, and type systems
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObject (grammar)Computer scienceSubtypingType theoryProgramming languageType (biology)State (computer science)Class (philosophy)Relation (database)Object-oriented programmingMethodTheoretical computer scienceObject modelArtificial intelligenceData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In current class-based Object-Oriented Programming Languages (OOPLs), object types include only static features. How to add object dynamic behaviors modeled by Harel's statecharts into object types is a challenging task. We propose adding states and state transitions, which are largely unstated in object type theory, into object type definitions and typing rules. We argue that dynamic behaviors of objects should be part of object type definitions. We propose our type theory, the τ -calculus, which refines Abadi and Cardelli's ζ -calculus, in modeling objects with their dynamic behaviors. In our proposed type theory, we also explain that a subtyping relation between object types should imply the inclusion of their dynamic behaviors. By adding states and state transitions into object types, we propose modifying programming language constructs for state tracking.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.004
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.010
Scholarly communication0.0070.015
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectronic Notes in Theoretical Computer ScienceSame topicLogic, programming, and type systemsFrench-language works237,207