MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2727889954

CARIBOO: A Multi-Strategy Termination Proof Tool Based on Induction

2003· article· en· W2727889954 on OpenAlexaff
Olivier Fissore, Isabelle Gnaedig, Claude Kirchner

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLogic, programming, and type systems
Canadian institutionsPrevention of Organ Failure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRewritingAbstractionComputer scienceSatisfiabilitySimple (philosophy)Constraint (computer-aided design)Theoretical computer scienceProcess (computing)SolverProgramming languageConstraint programmingAlgorithmMathematicsMathematical optimization
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1 A termination proof tool for rule-based programs CARIBOO is a termination proof tool for rule-based programming languages, where a program is a rewrite system and query evaluation consists in rewriting a ground expression [3]. It applies to languages such as ASF+SDF, Maude, Cafe-OBJ, or ELAN. By contrast with most of the existing tools, which prove in general termination of standard rewriting (rewriting without strategy) on the free term algebra, our proof tool, named CARIBOO (for Computing AbstRaction for Induction Based termination prOOfs), allows proving termination under specific reduction strategies, which becomes of special interest when the computations diverge for standard rewriting. It deals in particular with: the innermost strategy, specially useful when the rule-based formalism expresses functional programs, and central in the evaluation process of ELAN, local strategies on operators, provided in OBJ-like languages, and allowing to control evaluation strategies in a very fine local way, the outermost strategy, useful to avoid evaluations known to be non terminating for the standard strategy, to make strategy computations shorter, and used for interpreters and compilers using call by name. 2 Proving termination by explicit induction

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)0.003
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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 head0.272
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations5
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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