MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075941278 · doi:10.1145/353171.353194

An Aristotelian understanding of object-oriented programming

2000· article· en· W2075941278 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputability, Logic, AI Algorithms
Canadian institutionsSt. Jerome's UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceObject (grammar)Logic programmingPredicate (mathematical logic)Object-oriented programmingProgramming languageFirst-order logicProgramming paradigmEpistemologyRelation (database)Artificial intelligencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The folklore of the object-oriented programming community at times maintains that object-oriented programming has drawn inspiration from philosophy, specically that of Aristotle. We investigate this relation, first of all, in the hope of attaining a better understanding of object-oriented programming and, secondly, to explain aspects of Aristotelian logic to the computer science research community (since it differs from first order predicate calculus in a number of important ways). In both respects we endeavour to contribute to the theory of objects, albeit in a more philosophical than mathematical fashion.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.908
Threshold uncertainty score0.545

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Quick stats

Citations25
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicComputability, Logic, AI AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207