MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2294688766 · doi:10.5441/002/edbt.2014.81

Business-Intelligence Queries with Order Dependencies in DB2

2014· article· en· W2294688766 on OpenAlexaff
Jaroslaw Szlichta, Parke Godfrey, Jarek Gryz, Wenbin Ma, Weinan Qiu, Calisto Zuzarte

Bibliographic record

VenueMovebank · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Database Systems and Queries
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceFunctional dependencyDependency (UML)Query optimizationOnline analytical processingExploitData integrityTheoretical computer scienceData miningRelational databaseData warehouseDatabaseArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Business-intelligence queries often involve SQL functions and algebraic expressions. There can be clear semantic relationships between a column’s values and the values of a function over that column. A common property is monotonicity: as the column’s values ascend, so do the function’s values. This we call an order dependency (OD). Queries can be evaluated more efficiently when the query optimizer uses order dependencies. They can be run even faster when the optimizer can also reason over known ODs to infer new ones. Order dependencies can be declared as integrity constraints, and they can be detected automatically for many types of SQL functions and algebraic expressions. We present optimization techniques using ODs for queries that involve join, order by, group by, partition by, and distinct. Essentially, ODs can further exploit interesting orders to eliminate or simplify potentially expensive sorts in the query plan. We evaluate these techniques over our implementation in IBM R ° DB2 R ° V10 using the TPC-DS R ° benchmark schema and some IBM customer inspired queries. Our experimental results demonstrate a significant performance gain. We additionally devise an algorithm for testing logical implication for ODs which is polynomial over the size of the set of given ODs. We show that the inference algorithm which we have implemented in DB2 is sound and complete over sets of ODs over natural domains. This enables the optimizer to infer useful ODs from known ODs.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.012
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMovebankSame topicAdvanced Database Systems and QueriesFrench-language works237,207