The verified software repository: a step towards the verifying compiler
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
Abstract The verified software repository is dedicated to a long-term vision of a future in which all computer systems justify the trust that society increasingly places in them. This would be accompanied by a substantial reduction in the current high costs of programming error, incurred during the design, development, testing, installation, maintenance, evolution, and retirement of computer software. An important technical contribution to this vision will be a verifying compiler: a tool-set that automatically proves that a program will always meet its specification, insofar as this has been formalised, without even needing to run it. This has been a challenge for computing research for over 30 years, but the current state of the art now gives grounds for hope that it may be implemented in the foreseeable future. Achievement of the overall vision will depend also on continued progress of research into dependability and software evolution, as envisaged by the UKCRC Grand Challenge project in dependable systems evolution . The verified software repository is a first step towards the realisation of this long-term vision. It will maintain and develop an evolving collection of state-of-the-art tools, together with a representative portfolio of real programs and specifications on which to test, evaluate, and develop the tools. It will contribute initially to the inter-working of tools, and eventually to their integration. It will promote transfer of the relevant technology to industrial tools and into software engineering practice. It will build on the recognised achievements of practical formal development of safety-critical computer applications, and contribute to an international initiative in verified software, covering theory, tools, and experimental validation.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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