Practical virtual method call resolution for Java
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper addresses the problem of resolving virtual method and interface calls in Java bytecode. The main focus is on a new practical technique that can be used to analyze large applications. Our fundamental design goal was to develop a technique that can be solved with only one iteration, and thus scales linearly with the size of the program, while at the same time providing more accurate results than two popular existing linear techniques, class hierarchy analysis and rapid type analysis.We present two variations of our new technique, variable-type analysis and a coarser-grain version called declared-type analysis. Both of these analyses are inexpensive, easy to implement, and our experimental results show that they scale linearly in the size of the program.We have implemented our new analyses using the Soot frame-work, and we report on empirical results for seven benchmarks. We have used our techniques to build accurate call graphs for complete applications (including libraries) and we show that compared to a conservative call graph built using class hierarchy analysis, our new variable-type analysis can remove a significant number of nodes (methods) and call edges. Further, our results show that we can improve upon the compression obtained using rapid type analysis.We also provide dynamic measurements of monomorphic call sites, focusing on the benchmark code excluding libraries. We demonstrate that when considering only the benchmark code, both rapid type analysis and our new declared-type analysis do not add much precision over class hierarchy analysis. However, our finer-grained variable-type analysis does resolve significantly more call sites, particularly for programs with more complex uses of objects.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".