MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979393344 · doi:10.1504/ijiids.2012.045113

Handling sharable queries in both streaming and stored XML documents

2012· article· en· W1979393344 on OpenAlexaff
Marcel Karam, Rana Awada

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Intelligent Information and Database Systems · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Database Systems and Queries
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceXMLInformation retrievalQuery planStreaming XMLMatching (statistics)DatabaseWorld Wide WebWeb search querySargableSearch engine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

XML Publish/Subscribe systems are system-active and user-passive systems that asynchronously serve users’ queries. These queries are usually stored and later executed when matching XML documents become available. With large amounts of subscriptions and in the presence of sharable queries, efficient execution of these queries becomes a substantial requirement. In this work, we describe a novel approach that uses new physical algebra which is capable of handling a group of sharable queries that are submitted against streaming and/or stored XML documents. Our grouping approach is designed to share computations and eliminate redundant executions by producing a single algebraic query execution plan (QEP) for all resident queries and sharing execution in composed physical operators. To assess the effectiveness of our approach, we designed and implemented the physical algebra operators in a system which we then used to conduct experiments that helped us to compare between processing a single query and that of group of queries. Details of our proposed approach, the design and implementation of the related system and the results of our experimental study are presented in this article, together with a discussion of planned directions of future work.

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 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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.910
Threshold uncertainty score0.794

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.011
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.273
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Intelligent Information and Database SystemsSame topicAdvanced Database Systems and QueriesFrench-language works237,207