MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2441478892 · doi:10.1109/pst.2017.00054

A Certified Core Policy Language

2017· article· en· W2441478892 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSecurity and Verification in Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematical proofComputer scienceProgramming languageCorrectnessProof assistantCertificationSemantics (computer science)SyntaxOperational semanticsCore (optical fiber)Artificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the design and implementation of a Certified Core Policy Language (ACCPL) that can be used to express access-control policies. We define formal semantics for ACCPL and use the Coq Proof Assistant to state theorems about this semantics, to develop proofs for those theorems and to machine-check the proofs ensuring correctness guarantees are provided. The main design goal for ACCPL is the ability to reason about the policies written in ACCPL with respect to specific questions such as safety. In addition, ACCPL and the established proofs are integrated such that extensions to expressive power may be explored by also extending identifiable proof statements in the direction of the added expressivity. To this end, ACCPL is small (the syntax and the semantics of ACCPL only take a few pages to describe), although we believe ACCPL supports the core features of many access-control policy languages.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.874
Threshold uncertainty score0.389

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSecurity and Verification in ComputingFrench-language works237,207