Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

James G. Mitchell

dblp:94/2654 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
6ranked-venue papers
2as first author
1since 2021 · last 2022
0000-0002-8445-0935ORCID · corroborated

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 4 · 2 first-authorTheory of computation · 1Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 1 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
2 papers
Distributed systems · 53% Parallel and multicore computing · 23% Storage systems · 16%
Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
2 papers
Operating systems · 70% Runtime systems and virtual machines · 21% Programming languages and type systems · 8%

Topics — the 14 heaviest of 15, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Operating systems › operating system design
language-based operating systems
0.011996
JavaOS: Back to the Future (Abstract) · OSDI 1996
Parallel and multicore computing › parallel computing › parallel communication
communication mechanisms
0.011993
Subcontract: A Flexible Base for Distributed Programming · SOSP 1993
Distributed systems
distributed object systems
0.011993
Subcontract: A Flexible Base for Distributed Programming · SOSP 1993
Distributed systems
distributed programming
0.011993
Subcontract: A Flexible Base for Distributed Programming · SOSP 1993
Runtime systems and virtual machines › virtual machine implementation
java virtual machine
0.011996
JavaOS: Back to the Future (Abstract) · OSDI 1996
Memory systems
cache
0.011993
Subcontract: A Flexible Base for Distributed Programming · SOSP 1993
Storage systems
crash recovery
0.011993
Subcontract: A Flexible Base for Distributed Programming · SOSP 1993
Distributed systems
replication
0.011993
Subcontract: A Flexible Base for Distributed Programming · SOSP 1993
Storage systems › file systems
distributed file system
0.011981
A Comparison of Two Network-Based File Servers · SOSP 1981
Storage systems › file systems › distributed file system
network file system
0.011981
A Comparison of Two Network-Based File Servers · SOSP 1981
Programming languages and type systems
abstract data types
0.011975
On the Problem of Uniform References to Data Structures · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1975
Programming languages and type systems
language design
0.011975
On the Problem of Uniform References to Data Structures · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1975
Performance modeling and evaluation
benchmarking
0.011981
A Comparison of Two Network-Based File Servers · SOSP 1981
Software maintenance and evolution › software evolution
software change
0.011975
On the Problem of Uniform References to Data Structures · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 1975

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

object-oriented programming · 0.0trace-driven measurement · 0.0service experience analysis · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2022 Organizing the bacterial annotation space with amino acid sequence embeddings
abstract
BACKGROUND: Due to the ever-expanding gap between the number of proteins being discovered and their functional characterization, protein function inference remains a fundamental challenge in computational biology. Currently, known protein annotations are organized in human-curated ontologies, however, all possible protein functions may not be organized accurately. Meanwhile, recent advancements in natural language processing and machine learning have developed models which embed amino acid sequences as vectors in n-dimensional space. So far, these embeddings have primarily been used to classify protein sequences using manually constructed protein classification schemes. RESULTS: In this work, we describe the use of amino acid sequence embeddings as a systematic framework for studying protein ontologies. Using a sequence embedding, we show that the bacterial carbohydrate metabolism class within the SEED annotation system contains 48 clusters of embedded sequences despite this class containing 29 functional labels. Furthermore, by embedding Bacillus amino acid sequences with unknown functions, we show that these unknown sequences form clusters that are likely to have similar biological roles. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that amino acid sequence embeddings may be a powerful tool for developing more robust ontologies for annotating protein sequence data. In addition, embeddings may be beneficial for clustering protein sequences with unknown functions and selecting optimal candidate proteins to characterize experimentally.
Susanna R. Grigson, Jody C. McKerral, James G. Mitchell, Robert A. Edwards
BMC Bioinform.3
1996 JavaOS: Back to the Future (Abstract)
abstract
No abstract available.
James G. Mitchell
OSDI1
1993 Subcontract: A Flexible Base for Distributed Programming
abstract
A key problem in operating systems is permitting the orderly introduction of new properties and new implementation techniques. We describe a mechanism, subcontract, that within the context of an object-oriented distributed system permits application programmers control over fundamental object mechanisms. This allows programmers to define new object communication mechanisms without modifying the base system. We describe how new subcontracts can be introduced as alternative communication mechanisms in the place of existing subcontracts. We also briefly describe some of the uses we have made of the subcontract mechanism to support caching, crash recovery, and replication.
Graham Hamilton, Michael L. Powell, James G. Mitchell
SOSP3
1981 A Comparison of Two Network-Based File Servers
abstract
This paper compares two working file servers in terms of their design goals, implementation issues, performance, and service experience. One server, the Xerox Distributed File System (XDFS) [10], was built at the Xerox Palo Alto Research Center; the other, the Cambridge File Server (CFS) [2, 3, 4], was built at the Cambridge University Computer Laboratory.
James G. Mitchell, Jeremy Dion
SOSP1
1978 Proof Rules for the Programming Language Euclid
Ralph L. London, John V. Guttag, James J. Horning, Butler W. Lampson, James G. Mitchell, Gerald J. Popek
Acta Informatica5
1975 On the Problem of Uniform References to Data Structures
abstract
The cost of a change to a large software system is often primarily a function of the size of the system rather than the complexity of the change. One reason for this is that programs which access some given data structure must operate on it using notations which are determined by its exact representation. Thus, changing how it is implemented may necessitate changes to the programs which access it. This paper develops a programming language notation and semantic interpretations which allow a program to operate on a data object in a manner which is dependent only on its logical or abstract properties and independent of its underlying concrete representation.
Charles M. Geschke, James G. Mitchell
IEEE Trans. Software Eng.2