Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent type systems allow the programmer to use types that describe more precisely the invariants on which the program relies. But in order to satisfy the type system, it often becomes necessary to help the type checker with extra annotations that justify why a piece of code is indeed well-formed. Such annotations take the form of term-level type manipulations, such as type abstractions, type applications, existential package packing and opening, as well as coercions, or casts. While those operations have no direct runtime cost, they tend to introduce extra runtime operations equivalent to n-redexes or even empty loops in order to get to the point where we can apply that supposedly free operation. We show a coercion that is like a pacific Swiss army knife of coercions: it cannot cut but it can instantiate, open, pack, abstract, analyze, or do any combination thereof, reducing the need for extra surrounding runtime operations. And all that, of course, for the price of a single coercion, which still costs absolutely nothing at runtime. This new coercion is derived from Karl Crary's coercion calculus [Crary, 2000], but can also replace Crary and Weirich's vcase [Crary and Weirich, 1999]. It additionally happens to come in handy to work around some limitations of value polymorphism. It is presented in the context of Shao et al.'s Type System for Certified Binaries [Shao et al., 2002]. Other than the coercion itself, another interesting aspect of this work is a slightly unusual proof technique to show soundness of the type erasure using a pure type assignment language, making the no-op nature of our cast more obvious.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".