A declarative language for the design of structures
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Designing and building computer software provides a model for a class of design processes aimed at producing such artifacts as building structures, mechanical or electronic devices, which have structure as well as associated behaviour. Although visual design tools for some domains have been in use for some time, visual programming languages are a relatively recent phenomenon. Because visual programming languages provide general programming constructs, they have the expressive power that most specialised visual design languages lack, and should therefore provide a foundation for more powerful, general visual design languages. In a program, however, the structures being described are usually processes, whereas structured objects in general may be conceptually quite "non-process-like". Some programming paradigms are inherently less process-oriented, relying instead on high level specification of results. Logic programming has this property, and treats data and algorithms uniformly. On this basis the authors present a visual language for structured design, LSD, as an extension of a visual logic programming language.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it