MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2585220424 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.cs/0602098

Compositional Semantics for the Procedural Interpretation of Logic

2006· preprint· en· W2585220424 on OpenAlexaff
M. H. van Emden

Bibliographic record

VenueArXiv.org · 2006
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLogic, programming, and type systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWell-founded semanticsProgramming languageComputer sciencePredicate logicLogic programmingOperational semanticsSyntaxDenotational semanticsSemantics (computer science)First-order logicEquivalence (formal languages)Abstract syntaxPredicate functor logicAction semanticsAutoepistemic logicMathematicsMultimodal logicArtificial intelligenceDescription logicDiscrete mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Semantics of logic programs has been given by proof theory, model theory and by fixpoint of the immediate-consequence operator. If clausal logic is a programming language, then it should also have a compositional semantics. Compositional semantics for programming languages follows the abstract syntax of programs, composing the meaning of a unit by a mathematical operation on the meanings of its constituent units. The procedural interpretation of logic has only yielded an incomplete abstract syntax for logic programs. We complete it and use the result as basis of a compositional semantics. We present for comparison Tarski's algebraization of first-order predicate logic, which is in substance the compositional semantics for his choice of syntax. We characterize our semantics by equivalence with the immediate-consequence operator.

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 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 score0.947
Threshold uncertainty score0.479

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArXiv.orgSame topicLogic, programming, and type systemsFrench-language works237,207