MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4254768160 · doi:10.1145/2936313.2816713

Compiling for multi-language task migration

2015· article· en· W4254768160 on OpenAlexafffund
Marc Feeley

Bibliographic record

VenueACM SIGPLAN Notices · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLogic, programming, and type systems
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceCompilerSoftware portabilityProgramming languagePython (programming language)Just-in-time compilationJavaScriptJavaHost (biology)Task (project management)Virtual machineDynamic compilation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Task migration allows a running program to continue its execution in a different destination environment. Increasingly, execution environments are defined by combinations of cultural and technological constraints, affecting the choice of host language, libraries and tools. A compiler supporting multiple target environments and task migration must be able to marshal continuations and then unmarshal and continue their execution, ideally, even if the language of the destination environment is different. In this paper, we propose a compilation approach based on a virtual machine that strikes a balance between implementation portability and efficiency. We explain its implementation within a Scheme compiler targeting JavaScript, PHP, Python, Ruby and Java -- some of the most popular host languages for web applications. As our experiments show, this approach compares well with other Scheme compilers targeting high-level languages in terms of execution speed, being sometimes up to 3 orders of magnitude faster.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM SIGPLAN NoticesSame topicLogic, programming, and type systemsFrench-language works237,207