MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072526459 · doi:10.1145/1321440.1321494

A fast unified optimal route query evaluation algorithm

2007· article· en· W2072526459 on OpenAlexaff
Edward P. F. Chan, Jie Zhang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCorrectnessAlgorithmPruningTheoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate the problem of how to evaluate, fast and efficiently, classes of optimal route queries on a massive graph in a unified framework. To evaluate a route query effectively, a large network is partitioned into a collection of fragments, and distances of some optimal routes in the network are pre-computed. Under such a setting, we find a unified algorithm that can evaluate classes of optimal route queries. The classes that can be processed efficiently are called constraint preserving (CP) which include, among others, shortest path, forbidden edges, forbidden nodes and α-autonomy optimal route query classes. We prove the correctness of the unified algorithm. We then turn our attention to the optimization of the proposed algorithm. Several pruning and optimization techniques are derived that minimize the search time and I/O accesses. We show empirically that these techniques are effective. The proposed optimal route query evaluation algorithm, with all these techniques incorporated, is compared with a main-memory and a disk-based brute-force CP algorithms. We show experimentally that the proposed unified algorithm outperforms the brute-force algorithms, both in term of CPU time and I/O cost, by a wide margin.

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)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations11
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicData Management and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207