Algorithms for distributional and adversarial pipelined filter ordering problems
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
Pipelined filter ordering is a central problem in database query optimization. The problem is to determine the optimal order in which to apply a given set of commutative filters (predicates) to a set of elements (the tuples of a relation), so as to find, as efficiently as possible, the tuples that satisfy all of the filters. Optimization of pipelined filter ordering has recently received renewed attention in the context of environments such as the Web, continuous high-speed data streams, and sensor networks. Pipelined filter ordering problems are also studied in areas such as fault detection and machine learning under names such as learning with attribute costs, minimum-sum set cover, and satisficing search. We present algorithms for two natural extensions of the classical pipelined filter ordering problem: (1) a distributional-type problem where the filters run in parallel and the goal is to maximize throughput, and (2) an adversarial-type problem where the goal is to minimize the expected value of multiplicative regret . We present two related algorithms for solving (1), both running in time O ( n 2 ), which improve on the O ( n 3 log n ) algorithm of Kodialam. We use techniques from our algorithms for (1) to obtain an algorithm for (2).
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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