MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966649174 · doi:10.5555/2819009.2819156

Mining temporal properties of data invariants

2015· article· en· W1966649174 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Conference on Software Engineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Engineering Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorrectnessTemporal logicComputer scienceProperty (philosophy)Linear temporal logicField (mathematics)Theoretical computer scienceData miningProgramming languageMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

System specifications are important in maintaining program correctness, detecting bugs, understanding systems and guiding test case generation. Often, these specifications are not explicitly written by developers. If we want to use them for analysis, we need to obtain them through other methods; for example, by mining them out of program behavior. Several tools exist to mine data invariants and temporal properties from program traces, but few examine temporal relationships between data invariants. An example of this kind of relationship would be the return value of method isFull? is false until field size reaches value capacity. We propose a data-temporal property miner, Quarry, which mines Linear Temporal Logic (LTL) relations of arbitrary length and complexity between Daikon-style data invariants. We infer data invariants from systems using Daikon, recompose these data invariants into sequences, and mine temporal properties over these sequences. Our preliminary results suggest that this method may recover important system properties.

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 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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.836
Threshold uncertainty score0.632

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.001
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 head0.213
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.112 · 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