MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997164579 · doi:10.1145/1321440.1321507

Mapgraph

2007· article· en· W1997164579 on OpenAlexaff
Todd Eavis, Ahmad Taleb

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Database Systems and Queries
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOnline analytical processingComputer scienceGranularityHierarchyOverhead (engineering)Dimension (graph theory)Cube (algebra)Data cubeRepresentation (politics)Theoretical computer scienceData warehouseDistributed computingDatabaseData miningProgramming languageMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Online Analytical Processing is a database paradigm that provides for the rich analysis of multi-dimensional data. OLAP is often supported by a logical structure known as the Cube. However, supporting efficient OLAP query resolution in enterprise scale environments is an issue of considerable complexity. In practice, the difficulty of the problem is exacerbated by the existence of dimension hierarchies that sub-divide core dimensions into aggregation layers of varying granularity. Common hierarchy-sensitive query operations such as Rollup and Drilldown can be very costly on large cubes. Moreover, facilities for the representation of more complex hierarchical relationships are not well supported by conventional techniques. This paper presents a robust hierarchy infrastructure called mapGraph that supports the efficient and transparent manipulation of attribute hierarchies within OLAP environments. Experimental results verify that, when compared to the alternatives, very little additional overhead is introduced, even when advanced functionality is exploited.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0550.019

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations13
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Database Systems and QueriesFrench-language works237,207