MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989811697 · doi:10.1109/iccsa.2010.35

I/O-Efficient Rectangular Segment Search

2010· article· en· W1989811697 on OpenAlexaff
Gautam Das, Bradford G. Nickerson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Geometry and Mesh Generation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCombinatoricsSet (abstract data type)Space (punctuation)Line (geometry)Computer scienceRange (aeronautics)Binary logarithmDiscrete mathematicsAlgorithmMathematicsGeometryProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract-We consider the I/O-efficient rectangular segment search problem in 2D. The problem involves storing a given set S of N line segments in a data structure such that an axis aligned rectangular range query R can be performed efficiently; i.e., report all line segments in S which intersect R. We give a data structure requiring space O(N(N/B)2) disk blocks that can answer a range query R using O(IogBN + K/B) I/Os, where B is the number of line segments transferred in one I/O, and K is the number of line segments intersecting R. Search complexity of O(logB(N/B) + K/B) I/Os can be achieved with reduced storage if the set S contains only non-intersecting line segments, or if set S contains only horizontal and vertical line segments. In the former case the space complexity is O((N/B)2) disk blocks and in the latter case the space complexity is O(N log N/log logBN). We also consider the problem of finding all the line segments which are entirely within the rectangle R if the set S contains only vertical and horizontal line segments. For this problem, an optimal data structure is presented with size O(N log N/log logBN) disk blocks that requires O(logB(N/B) + K/B) I/Os to answer the query.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicComputational Geometry and Mesh GenerationFrench-language works237,207