MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125827816 · doi:10.1109/cmpsac.1990.139367

Concurrent transaction execution in multidatabase systems

2002· article· en· W2125827816 on OpenAlexaff
Ken Barker, M. TAMER ÖZSU

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed systems and fault tolerance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSerializabilityComputer scienceDistributed transactionDistributed computingDatabase transactionConcurrency controlScheduleTransaction processingSerializationAtomicityOnline transaction processingDatabaseProgramming languageOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multidatabase serializability is defined as an extension of the well-known serializability theory in order to provide a theoretical framework for research in concurrency control of transactions over multidatabase systems. Also introduced are multidatabase serializability graphs which capture the ordering characteristics of global as well as local transactions. Two schedulers that produce multidatabase serializable histories are described. The first scheduler is a conservative one which only permits one global subtransaction to proceed if all of the global subtransactions can proceed for any given global transaction. The 'all or nothing' approach of this algorithm is simple, elegant, and correct. The second scheduler is more aggressive in that it attempts to schedule as many global subtransactions as possible as soon as possible. A distinguishing feature of this work is the environment that it considers; the most pessimistic scenario is assumed, where individual database management systems are totally autonomous with no knowledge of each other. This restricts the communication between them to be via the multidatabase layer and requires that the global scheduler 'hand down' the order of execution of global transactions.>

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations13
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDistributed systems and fault toleranceFrench-language works237,207