qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool/acol-interpreter-benchmark-eval

Trust tier 3
  • community
Source check pending

Checking that the SKILL.md file is still in the repository.

Evaluates the execution speed and dispatching efficiency of different interpreter implementations (AST vs. bytecode variants) for a simple imperative language (ACOL) in Prolog. Use when the user wants to benchmark on ACOL Interpreter Benchmarks, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports geometric_mean_runtime.

Install

npx vskill@latest install qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool/acol-interpreter-benchmark-eval

SKILL.md

acol-interpreter-benchmark-eval

On the Performance of Bytecode Interpreters in Prolog — Korner et al. (2020) (arXiv:2008.12543, 2020)

What this evaluates

Evaluates the execution speed and dispatching efficiency of different interpreter implementations (AST vs. bytecode variants) for a simple imperative language (ACOL) in Prolog.

Datasets

  • ACOL Interpreter Benchmarks — total 6; splits: test (6); repo https://github.com/pkoerner/prolog-interpreters

Metrics

  • geometric_mean_runtime (primary) — range: other
  • Geometric mean of 10 execution runs per interpreter per benchmark. Also reported as normalized runtime relative to the baseline AST interpreter.

Input / output format

Input: ACOL programs (while-loops, if-statements, assignments, comparisons, additions/subtractions) with pre-initialized environment variables.

Output: Execution time in seconds (mean ± 0.95 confidence interval over 10 runs).

Scoring recipe

python
runtimes = []
for _ in range(10):
t = run_program_in_interpreter(program, interpreter)
runtimes.append(t)
mean_runtime = geometric_mean(runtimes)
normalized_runtime = mean_runtime / baseline_ast_mean_runtime
return mean_runtime, normalized_runtime

Common pitfalls

  • Compilation time is explicitly excluded; only interpreter dispatch/runtime is measured.
  • Geometric mean is used for aggregation instead of arithmetic mean, as specified by the authors.
  • Small handwritten programs may benefit from AST caching, skewing results compared to larger generated programs.

Evidence (verbatim from paper)

Each program was executed with every interpreter ten times. The runtime consists only of the time spent in the interpreter. Compilation time is excluded, as it is not implemented efficiently and, ultimately, not relevant. The mean value is determined by the geometric mean as proposed by [5].

Citation

bibtex
@misc{korner2020bytecode,
title={On the Performance of Bytecode Interpreters in Prolog},
author={Korner et al. (2020)},
year={2020},
note={arXiv:2008.12543}
}
  • arXiv: 2008.12543

Security

  • Security scanPassed, 90 of 100Pattern checks on the skill's files.
  • Model reviewPassed

Quality evaluation

  • Task evaluationNot runNo evaluation yet. Run one in Skill Studio.

Source

Popularity

Repository stars
3
Repository forks
1
7-day trend score
12

Stars and forks are for the whole GitHub repository, not this skill alone. Not refreshed yet.

Works with

Any agent vskill installs to: 56 targets in all. These 39 have a page on this site.

  • Claude Code
  • Cursor
  • GitHub Copilot
  • Windsurf
  • Codex
  • Gemini CLI
  • Cline
  • Amp
  • Roo Code
  • Goose
  • Continue
  • Kilo Code
  • Junie
  • Trae
  • OpenHands
  • Qwen Code
  • AI Agent
  • Tabnine Chat
  • Sourcegraph Cody
  • Amazon Q
  • Firebase Genkit
  • Sweep
  • Devin
  • Phind
  • Mentat
  • Claude Desktop
  • Aider
  • GPT Pilot
  • Plandex
  • bolt.new
  • v0
  • Replit Agent
  • Anse
  • TypingMind
  • BetterChatGPT
  • LibreChat
  • Warp AI
  • Pieces
  • Fig AI
Embed badge
vskill VERIFIED badge
[![vskill VERIFIED](https://verified-skill.com/api/v1/skills/qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool/acol-interpreter-benchmark-eval/badge)](https://verified-skill.com/skills/qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool/acol-interpreter-benchmark-eval)

Something wrong with this skill or its page? Tell us.