MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003638206 · doi:10.1145/2858965.2814272

Static analysis of event-driven Node.js JavaScript applications

2015· article· en· W3003638206 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

VenueACM SIGPLAN Notices · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSecurity and Verification in Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceJavaScriptEvent (particle physics)Asynchronous communicationCallbackSuiteNode (physics)Programming languageFalse positive paradoxOperating systemComputer networkArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many JavaScript programs are written in an event-driven style. In particular, in server-side Node.js applications, operations involving sockets, streams, and files are typically performed in an asynchronous manner, where the execution of listeners is triggered by events. Several types of programming errors are specific to such event-based programs (e.g., unhandled events, and listeners that are registered too late). We present the event-based call graph, a program representation that can be used to detect bugs related to event handling. We have designed and implemented three analyses for constructing event-based call graphs. Our results show that these analyses are capable of detecting problems reported on StackOverflow. Moreover, we show that the number of false positives reported by the analysis on a suite of small Node.js applications is manageable.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.893
Threshold uncertainty score0.401

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.251 · 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