MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3098557859 · doi:10.1145/3368089.3409757

ARDiff: scaling program equivalence checking via iterative abstraction and refinement of common code

2020· article· en· W3098557859 on OpenAlexaff
Sahar Badihi, Faridah Akinotcho, Yi Li, Julia Rubin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Testing and Debugging Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEquivalence (formal languages)Symbolic executionComputer scienceSymbolic trajectory evaluationAbstractionProgramming languageProgram analysisFormal equivalence checkingAbstraction model checkingModel checkingTheoretical computer scienceSymbolic data analysisStatic analysisAlgorithmMathematicsDiscrete mathematicsSoftware

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Equivalence checking techniques help establish whether two versions of a program exhibit the same behavior. The majority of popular techniques for formally proving/refuting equivalence relies on symbolic execution – a static analysis approach that reasons about program behaviors in terms of symbolic input variables. Yet, symbolic execution is difficult to scale in practice due to complex programming constructs, such as loops and non-linear arithmetic.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.008
Open science0.0060.011
Research integrity0.0020.005
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 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

Citations43
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware Testing and Debugging TechniquesFrench-language works237,207