MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3036125758 · doi:10.1145/3371071

Dependent type systems as macros

2019· article· en· W3036125758 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLogic, programming, and type systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMacroType (biology)Dependent typeScheme (mathematics)Type theoryType safetyType inference

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present Turnstile+, a high-level, macros-based metaDSL for building dependently typed languages. With it, programmers may rapidly prototype and iterate on the design of new dependently typed features and extensions. Or they may create entirely new DSLs whose dependent type ``power'' is tailored to a specific domain. Our framework's support of language-oriented programming also makes it suitable for experimenting with systems of interacting components, e.g., a proof assistant and its companion DSLs. This paper explains the implementation details of Turnstile+, as well as how it may be used to create a wide-variety of dependently typed languages, from a lightweight one with indexed types, to a full spectrum proof assistant, complete with a tactic system and extensions for features like sized types and SMT interaction.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.009
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.005

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the ACM on Programming LanguagesSame topicLogic, programming, and type systemsFrench-language works237,207