MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146021203 · doi:10.1109/ssdbm.2006.31

InterJoin: Exploiting Indexes and Materialized Views in XPath Evaluation

2006· article· en· W2146021203 on OpenAlexaff
Derek Phillips, Ning Zhang, Ihab F. Ilyas, M. TAMER ÖZSU

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Database Systems and Queries
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsXPathComputer scienceXML databaseInformation retrievalStreaming XMLXMLMaterialized viewImplementationQuery optimizationSimple API for XMLXML Schema (W3C)Path expressionXML validationExploitQuery languageDatabaseData miningEfficient XML InterchangeProgramming languageXML EncryptionXML SignatureViewWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

XML has become the standard for data exchange for a wide variety of applications, particularly in the scientific community. In order to efficiently process queries on XML representations of scientific data, we require specialized techniques for evaluating XPath expressions. Exploiting materialized views in query processing significantly enhances query processing performance. We propose a novel view definition that allows for intermediate (structural) join results to be stored and reused in XML query evaluation. Unlike current XML view proposals, our views do not require navigation in the original document or path-based pattern matching. Hence, they are evaluated significantly faster and are easily costed as part of a query plan. In general, current structural joins cannot exploit views efficiently when the view definition is not a prefix (or a suffix) of the XPath query. To increase the applicability of our proposed view definition, we propose a novel physical structural join operator called InterJoin. The InterJoin operator allows for joining interleaving XPath expressions, e.g., joining //A//C with //B to evaluate //A//B//C. InterJoin allows for more join alternatives in XML query plans. We propose several physical implementations for InterJoin, including a technique to exploit spatial indexes on the inputs. We give analytic cost models for the implementations so they can be costed in an existing XML query optimizer. Experiments on real and synthetic XML data show significant speed-ups of up to 200% using InterJoin, and speed-ups of up to 400% using our materialized views

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations11
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Database Systems and QueriesFrench-language works237,207