Inferring semantically related words from software context
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract—Code search is an integral part of software de-velopment and program comprehension. The difficulty of code search lies in the inability to guess the exact words used in the code. Therefore, it is crucial for keyword-based code search to expand queries with semantically related words, e.g., syn-onyms and abbreviations, to increase the search effectiveness. However, it is limited to rely on resources such as English dictionaries and WordNet to obtain semantically related words in software, because many words that are semantically related in software are not semantically related in English. This paper proposes a simple and general technique to automatically infer semantically related words in software by leveraging the context of words in comments and code. We achieve a reasonable accuracy in seven large and popular code bases written in C and Java. Our further evaluation against the state of art shows that our technique can achieve a higher precision and recall. Keywords-Semantically related words; code search; program comprehension I.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it