MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038120395 · doi:10.1145/1869459.1869521

Registration-based language abstractions

2010· article· en· W2038120395 on OpenAlexafffund
Samuel Davis, Gregor Kiczales

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Software Engineering Methodologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCenter for Advanced Study, University of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsProgrammerConstruct (python library)Computer scienceProgramming languageLanguage constructKey (lock)Very high-level programming languageHigh-level programming languageFourth-generation programming languageConstructed languageProgramming paradigmArtificial intelligenceFunctional logic programmingLinguisticsInductive programming

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Programming language innovation has been hindered by the difficulty of making changes to existing languages. A key source of difficulty is the tyrannical nature of existing approaches to realizing languages -- adding a new language construct means that any tool, document or programmer that works with the language must be prepared to deal with that construct.A registration-based approach makes it possible to define language constructs that are not tyrannical. They are instead transient -- the program appears to be written using the constructs only so long as a given programmer wants to see it that way. This approach may have the potential to greatly facilitate programming language innovation.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0080.015
Open science0.0060.011
Research integrity0.0020.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.011

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations19
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Software Engineering MethodologiesFrench-language works237,207