MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2165870196 · doi:10.1145/1772690.1772711

Automated object persistence for JavaScript

2010· article· en· W2165870196 on OpenAlexaff
Brett Cannon, Eric Wohlstadter

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed systems and fault tolerance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceJavaScriptRich Internet applicationWeb applicationCloud computingAjaxThe InternetWorld Wide WebCompilerOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditionally web applications have required an internet con-nection in order to work with data. Browsers have lacked any mechanisms to allow web applications to operate offline with a set of data to provide constant access to applica-tions. Recently, through browser plug-ins such as Google Gears, browsers have gained the ability to persist data for offline use. However, until now it’s been difficult for a web developer using these plug-ins to manage persisting data both locally for offline use and in the internet cloud due to: synchronization requirements, managing throughput and la-tency to the cloud, and making it work within the confines of a standards-compliant web browser. Historically in non-browser environments, programming language environments have offered automated object persistence to shield the de-veloper from these complexities. In our research we have cre-ated a framework which introduces automated persistence of data objects for JavaScript utilizing the internet. Un-like traditional object persistence solutions, ours relies only on existing or forthcoming internet standards and does not rely upon specific runtime mechanisms such as OS or in-terpreter/compiler support. A new design was required in order to be suitable to the internet’s unique characteristics of varying connection quality and a browser’s specific restric-tions. We validate our approach using benchmarks which show that our framework can handle thousands of data ob-jects automatically, reducing the amount of work needed by developers to support offline Web applications.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations11
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDistributed systems and fault toleranceFrench-language works237,207