MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117379916 · doi:10.1109/icde.2005.92

Monitoring k-Nearest Neighbor Queries over Moving Objects

2005· article· en· W2117379916 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSearch engine indexingComputer scienceScalabilityk-nearest neighbors algorithmGridData miningTree (set theory)Best bin firstNearest neighbor searchR-treeObject (grammar)Spatial databaseArtificial intelligenceSpatial analysisDatabaseMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many location-based applications require constant monitoring of k-nearest neighbor (k-NN) queries over moving objects within a geographic area. Existing approaches to this problem have focused on predictive queries, and relied on the assumption that the trajectories of the objects are fully predictable at query processing time. We relax this assumption, and propose two efficient and scalable algorithms using grid indices. One is based on indexing objects, and the other on queries. For each approach, a cost model is developed, and a detailed analysis along with the respective applicability is presented. The object-indexing approach is further extended to multi-levels to handle skewed data. We show by experiments that our grid-based algorithms significantly outperform R-tree-based solutions. Extensive experiments are also carried out to study the properties and evaluate the performance of the proposed approaches under a variety of 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.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.885
Threshold uncertainty score0.460

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 communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Quick stats

Citations307
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicData Management and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207