MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4304110905 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.7178116

Reassembly is Hard: A Reflection on Challenges and Strategies

2023· paratext· en· W4304110905 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

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2023
Typeparatext
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTechnology Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReflection (computer programming)Computer scienceProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We create our own benchmark with various combinations of compilers, linkers, target ISAs, and compiler options. Our benchmark is created by compiling three source packages totaling 122 executable programs as follows. • GNU coreutils (v8.30): 107 executable programs • GNU binutils (v2.31.1): 15 executable programs. We consider all possible combinations of the following configurations in order to produce assembly files and binaries with diverse assembly expression patterns. • ISA: x86 and x86-64 • Compilers: GCC v7.5.0 and Clang v12.0 • Linkers: GNU ld v2.30 and GNU gold v1.15 • PIE/non-PIE: produce a PIE or a non-PIE • Optimization: -O0, -O1, -O2, -O3, -Os, and -Ofast

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.606
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.041

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.212 · 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