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
Monitoring aggregates on IP traffic data streams is a compelling application for data stream management systems. The need for exploratory IP traffic data analysis naturally leads to posing related aggregation queries on data streams, that differ only in the choice of grouping attributes. In this paper, we address this problem of efficiently computing multiple aggregations over high speed data streams, based on a two-level LFTA/HFTA DSMS architecture, inspired by Gigascope.Our first contribution is the insight that in such a scenario, additionally computing and maintaining fine-granularity aggregation queries (phantoms) at the LFTA has the benefit of supporting shared computation. Our second contribution is an investigation into the problem of identifying beneficial LFTA configurations of phantoms and user-queries. We formulate this problem as a cost optimization problem, which consists of two sub-optimization problems: how to choose phantoms and how to allocate space for them in the LFTA. We formally show the hardness of determining the optimal configuration, and propose cost greedy heuristics for these independent sub-problems based on detailed analyses. Our final contribution is a thorough experimental study, based on real IP traffic data, as well as synthetic data, to demonstrate the effectiveness of our techniques for identifying beneficial configurations.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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