MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134498478 · doi:10.1109/ipdps.2002.1015486

An adaptive hash join algorithm on a network of workstations

2002· article· en· W2134498478 on OpenAlexafffund
Kenji Imasaki, Sivarama P. Dandamudi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Database Systems and Queries
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceHash joinHash functionJoin (topology)WorkstationSort-merge joinAlgorithmParallel computingPentiumMD5Distributed computingQuery optimizationDatabaseOperating systemProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to advances in computer technology, many organizations have a large number of workstation-class machines connected by LAN. Such a network of workstations (NOW) can be used for parallel processing, including database query processing. This paper proposes a new load sharing algorithm for hash join processing on NOWs. This new algorithm combines a chunking method with hash join to manage dynamic changes that occur in NOW environments. The algorithm is compared with two other algorithms: an adaptive nested-loop join and adaptive GRACE hash join. These three algorithms were evaluated on a Pentium-based heterogeneous NOW system with skewed data and various non-query background loads. The results show that the new algorithm is the best among the three in most of the cases and should be used for single join processing on NOWs.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations15
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Database Systems and QueriesFrench-language works237,207