QuAC: Quick Attribute-Centric Type Inference for 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
Python’s dynamic typing facilitates rapid prototyping and underlies its popularity in many domains. However, dynamic typing reduces the power of many static checking and bug-finding tools. Python type annotations can make these tools more useful. Type inference tools aim to reduce developers’ burden of adding them. However, existing type inference tools struggle to support dynamic features, infer correct types (especially container type parameters and non-builtin types), and run in reasonable time. Inspired by Python’s duck typing, where the attributes accessed on Python expressions characterize their implicit interfaces, we propose QuAC (Quick Attribute-Centric Type Inference for Python). At its core, QuAC collects attribute sets for Python expressions and leverages information retrieval techniques to predict classes from these attribute sets. It also recursively predicts container type parameters. We evaluate QuAC’s performance on popular Python projects. Compared to state-of-the-art non-LLM baselines, QuAC predicts types with high accuracy complementary to those predicted by the baselines while not sacrificing coverage. It also demonstrates clear advantages in predicting container type parameters and non-builtin types and reduces run times. Furthermore, QuAC is nearly two orders of magnitude faster than an LLM-based method while covering nearly half of its errorless non-trivial type predictions. It is also significantly more consistent at predicting container type parameters and non-builtin types than the LLM-based method, regardless of whether the project has ground-truth type annotations.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.002 | 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