MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095443555 · doi:10.1145/363516.363523

Proof linking

2000· article· en· W2095443555 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSecurity and Verification in Computing
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceCorrectnessBytecodeProgramming languageCode (set theory)ImplementationModular designDistributed computingJavaSet (abstract data type)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although mobile code systems typically employ link-time code verifiers to protect host computers from potentially malicious code, implementation flaws in the verifiers may still leave the host system vulnerable to attack. Compounding the inherent complexity of the verification algorithms themselves, the need to support lazy, dynamic linking in mobile code systems typically leads to architectures that exhibit strong interdependencies between the loader, the verifier, and the linker. To simplify verifier construction and provide improved assurances of verifier integrity, we propose a modular architecture based on the concept of proof linking. This architecture encapsulates the verification process and removes dependencies between the loader, the verifier, and the linker. We also formally model the process of proof linking and establish properties to which correct implementations must conform. As an example, we instantiate our architecture for the problem of Java bytecode verification and assess the correctness of this instantiation. Finally, we briefly discuss alternative mobile code verification architectures enabled by the proof-linking concept.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.951
Threshold uncertainty score0.462

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.225 · 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