MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126293901 · doi:10.1017/s0960129513000388

Multidimensional infinite data in the language Lucid

2014· article· en· W2126293901 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

VenueMathematical Structures in Computer Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceLucid dreamSequence (biology)ProgrammerTheoretical computer scienceValue (mathematics)Loop (graph theory)Programming languageAlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although the language Lucid was not originally intended to support computing with infinite data structures, the notion of (infinite) sequence quickly came to the fore, together with a demand-driven computation model in which demands are propagated for the values of particular values at particular index points. This naturally generalized to sequences of multiple dimensions so that a programmer could, for example, write a program that could be understood as a (nonterminating) loop in which one of the loop variables is an infinite vector. Programmers inevitably found use for more and more dimensions, which led to a problem which is fully solved for the first time in this paper. The problem is that the implementation's cache requires some estimate of the dimensions actually used to compute a value being fetched. This estimate can be difficult or (if dimensions are passed as parameters) impossible to obtain, and the demand-driven evaluation model for Lucid breaks down. We outline the evolution of Lucid which gave rise to this problem, and outline the solution, as used for the implementation of TransLucid, the latest descendant of Lucid.

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)0.003
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 score0.902
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0050.002
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.280 · 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