MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403222962 · doi:10.1145/3689714

Intensional Functions

2024· article· en· W4403222962 on OpenAlex
Zachary Palmer, Nathaniel Wesley Filardo, Ke Wu

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

VenueProceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLogic, programming, and type systems
Canadian institutionsMicrosoft (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Functions in functional languages have a single elimination form — application — and cannot be compared, hashed, or subjected to other non-application operations. These operations can be approximated via defunctionalization: functions are replaced with first-order data and calls are replaced with invocations of a dispatch function. Operations such as comparison may then be implemented for these first-order data to approximate e.g. deduplication of continuations in algorithms such as unbounded searches. Unfortunately, this encoding is tedious, imposes a maintenance burden, and obfuscates the affected code. We introduce an alternative in intensional functions , a language feature which supports the definition of non-application operations in terms of a function’s definition site and closure-captured values. First-order data operations may be defined on intensional functions without burdensome code transformation. We give an operational semantics and type system and prove their formal properties. We further define intensional monads , whose Kleisli arrows are intensional functions, enabling monadic values to be similarly subjected to additional operations.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.771
Threshold uncertainty score0.406

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.266
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