MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1702322733

Efficient matching for state-persistent publish/subscribe systems

2003· article· en· W1702322733 on OpenAlexaff
Hubert Ka Yau Leung, Hans‐Arno Jacobsen

Bibliographic record

VenueConference of the Centre for Advanced Studies on Collaborative Research · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPeer-to-Peer Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublicationComputer scienceStateless protocolScalabilityMatching (statistics)DisseminationState (computer science)Distributed computingComputer networkDatabaseAlgorithm
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Content-based publish/subscribe systems allow information dissemination and fine-grained information filtering in loosely coupled distributed systems. Stateless publish/subscribe systems send notifications to all subscribers whose subscriptions match an incoming publication. State-persistent publish/subscribe systems, a recently proposed model that stores the states of both publications and subscriptions, only send notifications upon state transitions. The information filtering process requires an efficient matching algorithm with high throughput and scalability. Although there have been studies on matching algorithms for stateless publish/subscribe systems, the matching problem for state-persistent publish/subscribe systems is still an open research problem. This paper presents a novel content-based matching algorithm and its data structures for state-persistent publish/subscribe systems. We will also present the complexity analysis and results of simulations that validates the analytical predictions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.120
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.258 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConference of the Centre for Advanced Studies on Collaborative ResearchSame topicPeer-to-Peer Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207