MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153269672 · doi:10.1145/1542431.1542443

Efficient alias set analysis using SSA form

2009· article· en· W2153269672 on OpenAlexaff
Nomair A. Naeem, Ondřej Lhoták

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLogic, programming, and type systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceAliasPointer (user interface)Theoretical computer scienceSet (abstract data type)Data structureAlgorithmData miningArtificial intelligenceProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Precise, flow-sensitive analyses of pointer relationships often represent each object using the set of local variables that point to it (the alias set), possibly augmented with additional predicates. Many such analyses are difficult to scale due to the size of the abstraction and due to flow sensitivity. The focus of this paper is on efficient representation and manipulation of the alias set. Taking advantage of certain properties of static single assignment (SSA) form, we propose an efficient data structure that allows much of the representations of sets at different points in the program to be shared. The transfer function for each statement, instead of creating an updated set, makes only local changes to the existing data structure representing the set. The key enabling properties of SSA form are that every point at which a variable is live is dominated by its definition, and that the definitions of any set of simultaneously live variables are totally ordered according to the dominance relation. We represent the variables pointing to an object using a list ordered consistently with the dominance relation. Thus, when a variable is newly defined to point to the object, it need only be added to the head of the list. A back edge at which some variables cease to be live requires only dropping variables from the head of the list. We prove that the analysis using the proposed data structure computes the same result as a set-based analysis. We empirically show that the proposed data structure is more efficient in both time and memory requirements than set implementations using hash tables and balanced trees.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations13
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLogic, programming, and type systemsFrench-language works237,207