一句话：提出统一评估框架，对比若干主流有类型–无类型交互语义，帮助设计者分析自身动态语义的保证。
在有类型代码与无类型代码交互时，文献中存在多种维护类型完整性的策略，但它们的动态语义差异缺乏统一比较基础。本文提出一个统一的评估框架，用以刻画若干主流有类型–无类型交互语义之间的区别。该框架将不同语义置于同一评估基准之下，揭示各语义对类型完整性所提供的保证及其差异。作者指出，类型系统设计者可以借助这一框架，分析自己设计的动态语义所提供的保证。文章以概念框架和比较分析为主，未涉及大规模实证评估。
The literature presents many strategies for enforcing the integrity of types when typed code interacts with untyped code. This article presents a uniform evaluation framework that characterizes the differences among some major existing semantics for typed–untyped interaction. Type system designers can use this framework to analyze the guarantees of their own dynamic semantics.
@article{paperbot2137,
title = {Typed–Untyped Interactions: A Comparative Analysis},
author = {Ben Greenman and Christos Dimoulas and Matthias Felleisen},
journal = {ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems},
volume = {45},
number = {1},
year = {2023},
doi = {10.1145/3579833}
}