Improving the performance of list intersection
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
List intersection is a central operation, utilized excessively for query processing on text and databases. We present list intersection algorithms for an arbitrary number of sorted and unsorted lists tailored to the characteristics of modern hardware architectures. Two new list intersection algorithms are presented for sorted lists. The first algorithm, termed Dynamic Probes , dynamically decides the probing order on the lists exploiting information from previous probes at runtime. This information is utilized as a cache-resident microindex. The second algorithm, termed Quantile-based , deduces in advance a good probing order, thus avoiding the overhead of adaptivity and is based on detecting lists with non-uniform distribution of document identifiers. For unsorted lists, we present a novel hash-based algorithm that avoids the overhead of sorting. A detailed experimental evaluation is presented based on real and synthetic data using existing chip multiprocessor architectures with eight cores, validating the efficiency and efficacy of the proposed algorithms.
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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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