MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414978574 · doi:10.1145/3763126

Flix: A Design for Language-Integrated Datalog

2025· article· en· W4414978574 on OpenAlexaff
Magnus Madsen, Ondřej Lhoták

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSemantic Web and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDatalogImplementationGuard (computer science)Constraint programmingModular designDeclarative programmingProgram analysisLogic programming

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a comprehensive overview of the Datalog facilities in the Flix programming language. We show how programmers can write functions implemented as Datalog programs and we demonstrate how to build modular and reusable families of Datalog programs using first-class Datalog program values, rho abstraction, parametric polymorphism, and type classes. We describe several features that improve the ergonomics, flexibility, and expressive power of Datalog programming in Flix, including the inject and query program constructs, head and guard expressions, functional predicates, lattice semantics, and more. We illustrate Datalog programming in Flix with several applications, including implementations of Ullman's algorithm to stratify Datalog programs, the Ford-Fulkerson algorithm for maximum flow, and the IFDS and IDE algorithms for context-sensitive program analysis. The implementations of IFDS and IDE fulfill a long-term goal: to have fully modular, polymorphic, typed, and declarative formulations of these algorithms that can be instantiated with any abstract domain.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.007
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.279 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the ACM on Programming LanguagesSame topicSemantic Web and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207