Hybrid index maintenance for growing text collections
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
We present a new family of hybrid index maintenance strategies to be used in on-line index construction for monotonically growing text collections. These new strategies improve upon recent results for hybrid index maintenance in dynamic text retrieval systems. Like previous techniques, our new method distinguishes between short and long posting lists: While short lists are maintained using a merge strategy, long lists are kept separate and are updated in-place. This way, costly relocations of long posting lists are avoided.We discuss the shortcomings of previous hybrid methods and give an experimental evaluation of the new technique, showing that its index maintenance performance is superior to that of the earlier methods, especially when the amount of main memory available to the indexing system is small. We also present a complexity analysis which proves that, under a Zipfian term distribution, the asymptotical number of disk accesses performed by the best hybrid maintenance strategy is linear in the size of the text collection, implying the asymptotical optimality of the proposed strategy.
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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