MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1819449330 · doi:10.1109/icde.1998.655768

Query folding with inclusion dependencies

2002· article· en· W1819449330 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Database Systems and Queries
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSet (abstract data type)Folding (DSP implementation)Functional dependencyQuery languageExtension (predicate logic)Query optimizationInclusion (mineral)Materialized viewTheoretical computer scienceDependency theory (database theory)Data miningViewRelational databaseProgramming languageChemistryDatabase design

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Query folding is a technique for determining how a query may be answered using a given set of resources, which may include materialized views, cached results of previous queries or queries answerable by other databases. The power of query folding can be considerably enhanced by taking into account integrity constraints that are known to hold on base relations. This paper describes an extension of query folding that utilizes inclusion dependencies to find foldings of queries that would otherwise be overlooked. We describe a complete strategy for finding foldings in the presence of inclusion dependencies and present a basic algorithm that implements that strategy. We also describe extensions to this algorithm when both inclusion and functional dependencies are considered.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.938
Threshold uncertainty score0.233

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Quick stats

Citations63
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Database Systems and QueriesFrench-language works237,207