MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2943426458

Beagle as a HOL4 external ATP method

2014· preprint· en· W2943426458 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Thibault Gauthier, Cezary Kaliszyk, Chantal Keller, Michael Norrish

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBeagleComputer scienceBiologyEcology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents BEAGLE TAC, a HOL4 tactic for using Beagle as an external ATP for discharging HOL4 goals. We implement a translation of the higher-order goals to the TFA format of TPTP and add trace output to Beagle to reconstruct the intermediate steps derived by the ATP in HOL4. Our translation combines the characteristics of existing successful translations from HOL to FOL and SMT-LIB; however, we needed to adapt certain stages of the translation in order to benefit form the expressiveness of the TFA format and the power of Beagle. In our initial experiments, we demonstrate that our system can prove, without any arithmetic lemmas, 81 % of the goals solved by Metis. 1

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.582
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.303 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicParallel Computing and Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207