MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2281141245

Relational OLAP query optimization

2014· article· en· W2281141245 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

VenueComputer Science and Software Engineering · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Database Systems and Queries
Canadian institutionsIBM (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOnline analytical processingComputer scienceBusiness intelligenceBig dataAnalyticsScalabilityRelational databaseBusiness analyticsIBMData scienceDatabaseData warehouseRelational database management systemIn-Memory ProcessingCacheData miningWorld Wide WebBusiness analysisOperating systemBusiness modelSearch engine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the era of big data, companies are collecting and analyzing massive amount of data to help making business decisions. The focus of Business intelligence has been moved from reporting and performance monitoring to ad-hoc analysis, data exploration and knowledge self-discovery, where the user's train of thought is important. Business intelligence system must provide real time multidimensional analytic ability over big data volumes in order to meet the demands. Relational OLAP technologies provide better support for user-driven analysis over big volumes of dynamic data. In-memory OLAP technologies enable real time analytics experience. Their combination is the new trend to provide real time multidimensional analytics over big data volumes. However, Relational OLAP and in-memory OLAP have their own shortcomings and challenges. Relational OLAP could cause non-optimal relational database access. It often has intensive I/O and CPU demands. The biggest challenge of In-memory OLAP is combinatorial explosion. Transferring huge amount of data into multi-dimensional cache (cube) not only very time consuming but also takes considerable amount of resources. Increasing hardware resources, employing distributed in-memory data store, or re-designing MDX engine used by ROLAP to adopt hard to implement algorisms, e.g. parallel computation, are typically ways to overcome the above challenges. Instead of those costly approaches, this paper discusses several techniques that provide a way to improve performance and scalability without piling up hardware resources or going through major re-architecture. These techniques have been implemented in IBM Cognos Business Analytics (BA) solution and have been bringing success to customers since then.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.293
Threshold uncertainty score0.382

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 communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.181 · 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