Parallel Algebraic Effect Handlers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Algebraic effect handlers support composable and structured control-flow abstraction. However, existing designs of algebraic effects often require effects to be executed sequentially. This paper studies parallel algebraic effect handlers. In particular, we formalize λ p , a lambda calculus which models two key features, effect handlers and parallelizable computations, the latter of which takes the form of a for expression, inspired by the Dex programming language. We present various interesting examples expressible in our calculus. To show that our design can be implemented in a type-safe way, we present a higher-order polymorphic lambda calculus F p that extends λ p with a lightweight value dependent type system, and prove that F p preserves the semantics of λ p and enjoys syntactic type soundness. Lastly, we provide an implementation of the language design as a Haskell library, which mirrors both λ p and F p and reveals new connections to free applicative functors. All examples presented can be encoded in the Haskell implementation. We believe this paper is the first to study the combination of user-defined effect handlers and parallel computations, and it is our hope that it provides a basis for future designs and implementations of parallel algebraic effect handlers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".