MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062757415 · doi:10.1145/2103621.2103705

Programming with binders and indexed data-types

2012· article· en· W2062757415 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Cave, Brigitte Pientka

Bibliographic record

VenueACM SIGPLAN Notices · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLogic, programming, and type systems
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceProgramming languageDecidabilityType safetyOperational semanticsData typeType theoryUndecidable problemModular designProgramming language specificationTheoretical computer scienceSemantics (computer science)Type (biology)Programming paradigmInductive programmingProgramming domain

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We show how to combine a general purpose type system for an existing language with support for programming with binders and contexts by refining the type system of ML with a restricted form of dependent types where index objects are drawn from contextual LF. This allows the user to specify formal systems within the logical framework LF and index ML types with contextual LF objects. Our language design keeps the index language generic only requiring decidability of equality of the index language providing a modular design. To illustrate the elegance and effectiveness of our language, we give programs for closure conversion and normalization by evaluation. Our three key technical contribution are: 1) We give a bi-directional type system for our core language which is centered around refinement substitutions instead of constraint solving. As a consequence, type checking is decidable and easy to trust, although constraint solving may be undecidable. 2) We give a big-step environment based operational semantics with environments which lends itself to efficient implementation. 3) We prove our language to be type safe and have mechanized our theoretical development in the proof assistant Coq using the fresh approach to binding.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0060.017
Open science0.0050.009
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations29
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM SIGPLAN NoticesSame topicLogic, programming, and type systemsFrench-language works237,207