Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dynamic and polymorphic languages attach information, such as types, to run time objects, and therefore adapt the memory layout of values to include space for this information. This makes it difficult to efficiently implement IEEE754 floating-point numbers as this format does not leave an easily accessible space to store type information. The three main floating-point number encodings in use today, tagged pointers, NaN-boxing, and NuN-boxing, have drawbacks. Tagged pointers entail a heap allocation of all float objects, and NaN/NuN-boxing puts additional run time costs on type checks and the handling of other objects. This paper introduces self-tagging, a new approach to object tagging that uses an invertible bitwise transformation to map floating-point numbers to tagged values that contain the correct type information at the correct position in their bit pattern, superimposing both their value and type information in a single machine word. Such a transformation can only map a subset of all floats to correctly typed tagged values, hence self-tagging takes advantage of the non-uniform distribution of floating point numbers used in practice to avoid heap allocation of the most frequently encountered floats. Variants of self-tagging were implemented in two distinct Scheme compilers and evaluated on four microar¬chitectures to assess their performance and compare them to tagged pointers, NaN-boxing, and NuN-boxing. Experiments demonstrate that, in practice, the approach eliminates heap allocation of nearly all floating-point numbers and provides good execution speed of float-intensive benchmarks in Scheme with a negligible performance impact on other benchmarks, making it an attractive alternative to tagged pointers, alongside NaN-boxing and NuN-boxing.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.005 |
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".