MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974306683 · doi:10.1145/335191.335495

An approximate search engine for structural databases

2000· article· en· W1974306683 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

VenueACM SIGMOD Record · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBioinformatics and Genomic Networks
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceParsingDatabaseInformation retrievalXMLSet (abstract data type)Subgraph isomorphism problemGraph databaseGraphSearch engineHeuristicData structureXML databaseData miningTheoretical computer scienceWorld Wide WebProgramming languageArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When a person interested in a topic enters a keyword into a Web search engine, the response is nearly instantaneous (and sometimes overwhelming). The impressive speed is due to clever inverted index structures, caching, and a domain-independent knowledge of strings. Our project seeks to construct algorithms, data structures, and software that approach the speed of keyword-based search engines for queries on structural databases. A structural database is one whose data objects include trees, graphs, or a set of interrelated labeled points in two, three, or higher dimensional space. Examples include databases holding (i) protein secondary and tertiary structure, (ii) phylogenetic trees, (iii) neuroanatomical networks, (iv) parse trees, (v) molecular diagrams, and (vi) XML documents. Comparison queries on such databases require solving variants of the graph isomorphism or subisomorphism problems (for which all known algorithms are exponential), so we have explored a large heuristic space.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.950
Threshold uncertainty score0.477

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.266 · 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