Locality-Based pruning methods for web search
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article discusses a novel approach developed for static index pruning that takes into account the locality of occurrences of words in the text. We use this new approach to propose and experiment on simple and effective pruning methods that allow a fast construction of the pruned index. The methods proposed here are especially useful for pruning in environments where the document database changes continuously, such as large-scale web search engines. Extensive experiments are presented showing that the proposed methods can achieve high compression rates while maintaining the quality of results for the most common query types present in modern search engines, namely, conjunctive and phrase queries. In the experiments, our locality-based pruning approach allowed reducing search engine indices to 30% of their original size, with almost no reduction in precision at the top answers. Furthermore, we conclude that even an extremely simple locality-based pruning method can be competitive when compared to complex methods that do not rely on locality information.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it