MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044432004 · doi:10.1109/p2p.2008.17

Popularity-Aware Prefetch in P2P Range Caching

2008· article· en· W2044432004 on OpenAlexaff
Qiang Wang, Khuzaima Daudjee, M. TAMER ÖZSU

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCaching and Content Delivery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInstruction prefetchComputer sciencePopularityRange query (database)Query optimizationDatabaseRange (aeronautics)Query expansionDistributed databasePeer-to-peerWeb query classificationDistributed computingWeb search queryInformation retrievalComputer networkSearch engineCache

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unstructured peer-to-peer infrastructure has been widely employed to support large-scale distributed applications. Many of these applications, such as location-based services and multimedia content distribution, require the support of range selection queries. Under the widely adopted query shipping protocols, the cost of query processing is affected by the number of result copies or replicas in the system. Since range queries can return results that include poorly-replicated data items, the cost of these queries is usually dominated by the retrieval cost of these data items. In this work, we propose a popularity-aware prefetch-based approach that can effectively facilitate the caching of poorly-replicated data items that are potentially requested in subsequent range queries, resulting in substantial cost savings. We prove that the performance of retrieving poorly-replicated data items is guaranteed to improve under an increasing query load. Extensive experiments show that the overall range query processing cost decreases significantly under various query load settings.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCaching and Content DeliveryFrench-language works237,207