MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022740398 · doi:10.14778/1880172.1880173

Generating efficient execution plans for vertically partitioned XML databases

2010· article· en· W2022740398 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

VenueProceedings of the VLDB Endowment · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Database Systems and Queries
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceQuery planScalabilityDatabaseQuery optimizationXML databaseSargableDistributed databaseXMLOnline aggregationRelational databaseDistributed computingInformation retrievalWeb search querySearch engineOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Experience with relational systems has shown that distribution is an effective way of improving the scalability of query evaluation. In this paper, we show how distributed query evaluation can be performed in a vertically partitioned XML database system. We propose a novel technique for constructing distributed execution plans that is independent of local query evaluation strategies. We then present a number of optimizations that allow us to further improve the performance of distributed query execution. Finally, we present a response time-based cost model that allows us to pick the best execution plan for a given query and database instance. Based on an implementation of our techniques within a native XML database system, we verify that our execution plans take advantage of the parallelism in a distributed system and that our cost model is effective at identifying the most advantageous plans.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.509
Threshold uncertainty score0.313

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.252
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