MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4253384962 · doi:10.1145/381694.378827

Bytecode compression via profiled grammar rewriting

2001· article· en· W4253384962 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 · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAlgorithms and Data Compression
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBytecodeComputer scienceProgramming languageGrammarRewritingInterpreterLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the design and implementation of a method for producing compact, bytecoded instruction sets and interpreters for them. It accepts a grammar for programs written using a simple bytecoded stack-based instruction set, as well as a training set of sample programs. The system transforms the grammar, creating an expanded grammar that represents the same language as the original grammar, but permits a shorter derivation of the sample programs and others like them. A program's derivation under the expanded grammar forms the compressed bytecode representation of the program. The interpreter for this bytecode is automatically generated from the original bytecode interpreter and the expanded grammar. Programs expressed using compressed bytecode can be substantially smaller than their original bytecode representation and even their machine code representation. For example, compression cuts the bytecode for lcc from 199KB to 58KB but increases the size of the interpreter by just over 11KB.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score0.708

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.240 · 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