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
Programming languages are being taught and studied for more than 30 years in the graduate seminar on Programming Language Design. Students have studied the structure and design of programming languages from a human and linguistic perspective. Beginning at the University of Toronto in the mid-70's, this course has continued to interest generations of graduate students in computing at Queen's University since 1986. Every year, students study Wegner's Milestones in the History of Programming Languages to set the tone and foundation of the course, and propose their own more recent milestones to follow on Wegner's list. This document contains the “Milestones and comparisons” of more recent languages chosen by the class of 2008. This book is authored and edited by members of the class of fall semester 2008 at Queen's University, under wise guidance and teaching of Prof. Dr. Jim Cordy. It reviews a number of modern programming languages using the same timeless criteria outlined by Weinberg in 1971, based on human psychology and the linguistics of natural 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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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