MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037133727 · doi:10.1145/2463676.2463687

A query answering system for data with evolution relationships

2013· article· en· W2037133727 on OpenAlexaff
Siarhei Bykau, Flavio Rizzolo, Yannis Velegrakis

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsStatistics Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSchema (genetic algorithms)Database schemaQuery languageViewSchema evolutionInformation retrievalProbabilistic logicDatabase theoryDatabaseProbabilistic databaseRelational databaseDatabase designArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Evolving data has attracted considerable research attention. Researchers have focused on modeling and querying of schema/instance-level structural changes, such as, insertion, deletion and modification of attributes. Databases with such a functionality are known as temporal databases. A limitation of the temporal databases is that they treat changes as independent events, while often the appearance (or elimination) of some structure in the database is the result of an evolution of some existing structure. We claim that maintaining the causal relationship between the two structures is of major importance since it allows additional reasoning to be performed and answers to be generated for queries that previously had no answers. We present the TrenDS, a system for exploiting the evolution relationships between the structures in the database. In particular, our system combines different structures that are associated through evolution relationships into virtual structures to be used during query answering. The virtual structures define ``possible'' database instances, in a fashion similar to the possible worlds in the probabilistic databases. TrenDS uses a query answering mechanism that allows queries to be answered over these possible databases without materializing them. Evaluation of such queries raises many technical challenges, since it requires the discovery of Steiner forests on the evolution graphs.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.265

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 communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicData Management and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207