MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4324291633 · doi:10.1109/tse.2023.3256939

New Techniques for Static Symmetry Breaking in Many-Sorted Finite Model Finding

2023· article· en· W4324291633 on OpenAlexaff
Joseph Poremba, Nancy A. Day, Amirhossein Vakili

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSymmetry breakingCorrectnessTheoretical computer sciencesortSymmetry (geometry)Context (archaeology)InferenceAlgorithmMathematicsArtificial intelligencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Symmetry in finite model finding problems of many-sorted first-order logic (MSFOL) can be exploited to reduce the number of interpretations considered during search, thereby improving solver performance for tools such as the Alloy Analyzer. We present a framework to soundly compose static symmetry breaking schemes for many-sorted finite model finding. Then, we introduce and prove the correctness of three static symmetry breaking schemes for MSFOL: 1) one for functions with distinct sorts in the domain and range; 2) one for functions where the range sort appears in the domain; and 3) one for predicates. We provide a novel presentation of sort inference in the context of symmetry breaking that yields a new mathematical link between sorts and symmetries. We empirically investigate how our symmetry breaking approaches affect solving performance.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.042
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.042
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.004
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.012
Open science0.0060.010
Research integrity0.0020.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Software EngineeringSame topicMachine Learning and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207