Tacet is introduced, a language in which an analysis declares what it generated, states what it expects to find, and is refused any claim it cannot afford or cannot properly test, and is proved the metatheory machine-checked in Lean 4 with no admitted gaps.
Abstract
Empirical comparisons between systems are a standard form of evidence in computer science research, but few are checked for statistical validity: most are never framed as statistical tests at all. Existing multiple-comparison procedures could control the resulting error, but need inputs (what an analysis examined, and how its observations are arranged) that are not recoverable from a list of p-values. We introduce Tacet, a language in which an analysis declares what it generated, states what it expects to find, and is refused any claim it cannot afford or cannot properly test. Its core calculus T pairs a free estimation sublanguage, carrying a reported footprint and a purity bit that records whether any outcome was consulted in building a value, with a priced claim sublanguage, carrying a wealth transformer, connected only by a mechanism that prices a comparison. A sample selected by reading outcomes sets the purity bit and is recorded as having examined everything it read, permanently, so it can never be granted a one-sided or confirmatory price, without the system ever asking whether the analyst intended to cherry-pick. Whether a comparison is paired or clustered is computed statically from the artifact schema, from declared functional dependencies between key fields alone and before any data is read, and a mechanism that assumes that structure away is refused rather than priced. Because the wealth transformer is antitone in the realized p-value, affordability can be checked before the analysis runs too, turning pre-registration into a typing rule. We prove the metatheory machine-checked in Lean 4 with no admitted gaps, and demonstrate the approach on a reference implementation and two case studies on published artifacts, the SWE-bench Verified leaderboard and BIG-Bench Hard.
When a language model finds a sentence unusually cheap to predict, it is tempting to conclude that the sentence was in its training data. Almost every published test of that inference has had to guess which sentences were in the training data, the members, and which were not. This paper removes the guessing. Two model...
Paired equivalence testing at a declared margin is supply: paired equivalence testing at a declared margin, with certification tables giving the items an evaluation needs, computed from disagreement observed under compression, not from independent-binomial variance.
Software in production encounters inputs shaped by how it is used in practice. We study distribution-aware reliability estimation: given a program, its operational input distribution, and a condition of interest, determine how often that condition holds and certify the result with a guaranteed error bound. Symbolic and...
F-ICL is an open benchmark and toolkit that exhaustively enumerates the 86 million valid programs of length on a Turing-complete machine F, complement-symmetrised to remove output-polarity bias, and compute the exact posterior under a declared bounded Levin--Solomonoff prior.
Faithfulness to supplied information is not uniform in large language models: some rules, thresholds, or features shape outputs correctly while others do not, with nothing in a model's own explanations distinguishing the two. An industrial classification task motivates this observation, where supplying a classifier's e...
Vaishnavi Sreekumar· Journal of Computer and Fore...· 0 citations
A probe corpus of 42 retracted, fraudulent, and pseudoscientific papers is paired with a methodology for eliciting and scoring single-shot model engagement with each paper's framing, indicating an urgent need for guardrail infrastructure for scientific deployment of language models.
V. Rodionov, Shamil Assylbekov· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.