PyTracer: Automatically Profiling Numerical Instabilities in Python
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Numerical stability is a crucial requirement of reliable scientific computing. However, despite the pervasiveness of Python in data science, analyzing large Python programs remains challenging due to the lack of scalable numerical analysis tools available for this language. To fill this gap, we developed PyTracer, a profiler to quantify numerical instability in Python applications. PyTracertransparently instruments Python code to produce numerical traces and visualize them interactively in a Plotly dashboard. We designed PyTracerto be agnostic to numerical noise model, allowing for numerical profiling through Monte-Carlo Arithmetic, random rounding, random data perturbation, or structured noise for a particular application. We illustrate PyTracer's capabilities by testing the numerical stability of key functions in both SciPy and Scikit-learn, two dominant Python libraries for mathematical modeling. Through these evaluations, we demonstrate PyTraceras a scalable, automated, and generic framework for numerical profiling in Python.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it