MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4249626616 · doi:10.1145/1837852.1621615

Transactional pointcuts

2009· article· en· W4249626616 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 · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Software Engineering Methodologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJoin (topology)Computer scienceAspectJSort-merge joinProgramming languagePoint (geometry)Semantics (computer science)Aspect-oriented programmingJoinsMathematicsSoftware

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aspect-oriented mechanisms are characterized by their join point models. A join point model has three components: join points, which are elements of language semantics; "a means of identifying join points"; and "a means of affecting the behaviour at those join points." A pointcut-advice model is a dynamic join point model in which join points are points in program execution. Pointcuts select a set of join points, and advice affects the behaviour of the selected join points. In this model, join points are typically selected and advised independently of each other. That is, the relationships between join points are not taken into account in join point selection and advice. In practice, join points are often not independent. Instead, they form part of a higher-level operation that implements the intent of the developer ( e.g. managing a resource). There are natural situations in which join points should be selected only if they play a specific role in that operation. We propose a new join point model that takes join point interrelationships into account and allows the designation of more complex computations as join points. Based on the new model, we have designed an aspect-oriented construct called a transactional pointcut (transcut) . Transcuts select sets of interrelated join points and reify them into higher-level join points that can be advised. They share much of the machinery and intuition of pointcuts, and can be viewed as their natural extension. We have implemented a transcuts prototype as an extension to the AspectJ language and integrated it into the abc compiler. We present an example where a transcut is applied to implement recommended resource handling practices in the presence of exceptions within method boundaries.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.695
Threshold uncertainty score0.406

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.257 · 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