MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133491514 · doi:10.1145/872757.872832

A comprehensive XQuery to SQL translation using dynamic interval encoding

2003· article· en· W2133491514 on OpenAlexaff
David DeHaan, David Toman, Mariano P. Consens, M. TAMER ÖZSU

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Database Systems and Queries
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsXQueryComputer scienceSQLQuery languageXMLInformation retrievalRelational databaseProgramming languageDatabaseTheoretical computer scienceXML databaseWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The W3C XQuery language recommendation, based on a hierarchical and ordered document model, supports a wide variety of constructs and use cases. There is a diversity of approaches and strategies for evaluating XQuery expressions, in many cases only dealing with limited subsets of the language. In this paper we describe an implementation approach that handles XQuery with arbitrarily-nested FLWR expressions, element constructors and built-in functions (including structural comparisons). Our proposal maps an XQuery expression to a single equivalent SQL query using a novel dynamic interval encoding of a collection of XML documents as relations, augmented with information tied to the query evaluation environment. The dynamic interval technique enables (suitably enhanced) relational engines to produce predictably good query plans that do not preclude the use of sort-merge join query operators. The benefits are realized despite the challenges presented by intermediate results that create arbitrary documents and the need to preserve document order as prescribed by semantics of XQuery. Finally, our experimental results demonstrate that (native or relational) XML systems can benefit from the above technique to avoid a quadratic scale up penalty that effectively prevents the evaluation of nested FLWR expressions for large documents.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations162
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Database Systems and QueriesFrench-language works237,207