MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156647424 · doi:10.1109/icde.1994.282996

A query sampling method for estimating local cost parameters in a multidatabase system

2002· article· en· W2156647424 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSampling (signal processing)Query optimizationClass (philosophy)Sample (material)Data miningArtificial intelligenceDetector

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a multidatabase system (MDBS), some query optimization information related to local database systems may not be available at the global level because of local autonomy. To perform global query optimization, a method is required to derive the necessary local information. This paper presents a new method that employs a query sampling technique to estimate the cost parameters of an autonomous local database system. We introduce a classification for grouping local queries and suggest a cost estimation formula for the queries in each class. We present a procedure to draw a sample of queries from each class and use the observed costs of sample queries to determine the cost parameters by multiple regression. Experimental results indicate that the method is quite promising for estimating the cost of local queries in an MDBS.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">&gt;</ETX>

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score0.423

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.086
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Quick stats

Citations71
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicData Management and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207