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
Analyzing large scale data has become an important activity for many organizations, and is now facilitated by the MapReduce programming and execution model and its implementations, most notably Hadoop. Query languages such as Pig Latin, Hive, and Jaql make it simpler for users to express complex analysis tasks, and the compilers of these languages translate these complex tasks into workflows of MapReduce jobs. Each job in these workflows reads its input from the distributed file system used by the MapReduce system (e.g., HDFS in the case of Hadoop) and produces output that is stored in this distributed file system. This output is then read as input by the next job in the workflow. The current practice is to delete these intermediate results from the distributed file system at the end of executing the workflow. It would be more useful if these intermediate results can be stored and reused in future workflows. We demonstrate ReStore, an extension to Pig that enables it to manage storage and reuse of intermediate results of the MapReduce workflows executed in the Pig data analysis system. ReStore matches input workflows of MapReduce jobs with previously executed jobs and rewrites these workflows to reuse the stored results of the matched jobs. ReStore also creates additional reuse opportunities by materializing and reserving the output of query execution operators that are executed within a MapReduce job. In this demonstration we showcase the MapReduce jobs and sub-jobs recommended by ReStore for a given Pig query, the rewriting of input queries to reuse stored intermediate results, and a what-if analysis of the effectiveness of reusing stored outputs of previously executed jobs.
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 | 0.000 | 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