MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3101609070 · doi:10.1145/3428193

Fixpoints for the masses: programming with first-class Datalog constraints

2020· article· en· W3101609070 on OpenAlexafffund
Magnus Madsen, Ondřej Lhoták

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLogic, programming, and type systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDatalogProgramming languageComputer scienceSoundnessLogic programmingClass (philosophy)Deductive databaseSemantics (computer science)Extension (predicate logic)Theoretical computer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Datalog is a declarative logic programming language that has been used in a variety of applications, including big-data analytics, language processing, networking and distributed systems, and program analysis. In this paper, we propose first-class Datalog constraints as a mechanism to construct, compose, and solve Datalog programs at run time. The benefits are twofold: We gain the full power of a functional programming language to operate on Datalog constraints-as-values, while simultaneously we can use Datalog where it really shines: to declaratively express and solve fixpoint problems. We present an extension of the lambda calculus with first-class Datalog constraints, including its semantics and a type system with row polymorphism based on Hindley-Milner. We prove soundness of the type system and implement it as an extension of the Flix programming language.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.010
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0010.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations21
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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