MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414809028 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.00730

Maven-Lockfile: High Integrity Rebuild of Past Java Releases

2025· preprint· en· W4414809028 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Larissa Schmid, Elias Lundell, Yogya Gamage, Benoît Baudry, Martin Monperrus

Bibliographic record

VenueArXiv.org · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicScientific Computing and Data Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanada First Research Excellence FundInstitut de Valorisation des DonnéesStiftelsen för Strategisk Forskning
KeywordsJavaData integrityDependency (UML)SoftwareSoftware developmentSoftware system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modern software projects depend on many third-party libraries, complicating reproducible and secure builds. Several package managers address this with the generation of a lockfile that freezes dependency versions and can be used to verify the integrity of dependencies. Yet, Maven, one of the most important package managers in the Java ecosystem, lacks native support for a lockfile. We present Maven-Lockfile to generate and update lockfiles, with support for rebuilding projects from past versions. Our lockfiles capture all direct and transitive dependencies with their checksums, enabling high integrity builds. Our evaluation shows that Maven-Lockfile can reproduce builds from historical commits and is able to detect tampered artifacts. With minimal configuration, Maven-Lockfile equips Java projects with modern build integrity and build reproducibility, and fosters future research on software supply chain security in Java. Demonstration: https://youtu.be/eGgR3toBgxU

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.059
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: Software
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.059
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.007
Open science0.0040.006
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.004

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 head0.223
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArXiv.orgSame topicScientific Computing and Data ManagementFrench-language works237,207