MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090566883 · doi:10.1109/icsm.2010.5609695

Exploring the impact of context sensitivity on blended analysis

2010· article· en· W2090566883 on OpenAlexaff
Marc Fisher, Bruno Dufour, Shrutarshi Basu, Barbara G. Ryder

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Testing and Debugging Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceScalabilityContext (archaeology)PruningCall graphSource codeSensitivity (control systems)Empirical researchContext modelObject (grammar)Theoretical computer scienceData miningArtificial intelligenceDatabaseProgramming languageMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores the use of context sensitivity both intra- and inter-procedurally in a blended (static/dynamic) program analysis for identifying source of object churn in framework-intensive Web-based applications. Empirical experiments with an existing blended analysis algorithm compare combinations of (i) use of a context-insensitive call graph with a context-sensitive calling context tree, and (ii) use (or not) of context-sensitive code pruning within methods. These experiments demonstrate achievable gains in scalability and performance in terms of several metrics designed for blended escape analysis, and report results in terms of object instances created, to allow more realistic conclusions from the data than were possible previously.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.078
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.078
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware Testing and Debugging TechniquesFrench-language works237,207