MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112485457 · doi:10.14778/1687553.1687567

SQL/MapReduce

2009· article· en· W2112485457 on OpenAlexaff
Eric Friedman, Peter M. Pawlowski, John Cieslewicz

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the VLDB Endowment · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Database Systems and Queries
Canadian institutionsASTER
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSQLUser-defined functionDatabaseSchema (genetic algorithms)ScalabilityNoSQLProgramming languageQuery by ExampleInformation retrieval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A user-defined function (UDF) is a powerful database feature that allows users to customize database functionality. Though useful, present UDFs have numerous limitations, including install-time specification of input and output schema and poor ability to parallelize execution. We present a new approach to implementing a UDF, which we call SQL/MapReduce (SQL/MR), that overcomes many of these limitations. We leverage ideas from the MapReduce programming paradigm to provide users with a straightforward API through which they can implement a UDF in the language of their choice. Moreover, our approach allows maximum flexibility as the output schema of the UDF is specified by the function itself at query plan-time . This means that a SQL/MR function is polymorphic. It can process arbitrary input because its behavior as well as output schema are dynamically determined by information available at query plan-time, such as the function's input schema and arbitrary user-provided parameters. This also increases reusability as the same SQL/MR function can be used on inputs with many different schemas or with different user-specified parameters. In this paper we describe the motivation for this new approach to UDFs as well as the implementation within Aster Data Systems' n Cluster database. We demonstrate that in the context of massively parallel, shared-nothing database systems, this model of computation facilitates highly scalable computation within the database. We also include examples of new applications that take advantage of this novel UDF framework.

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)0.004
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0060.004
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.032

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations127
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the VLDB EndowmentSame topicAdvanced Database Systems and QueriesFrench-language works237,207