MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2333804416 · doi:10.5963/ijcsai0204001

Efficient Streaming Algorithms for Tree Matching Problems

2012· article· en· W2333804416 on OpenAlexaff
Yangjun Chen, Leping Zou

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Database Systems and Queries
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceNode (physics)XMLTree (set theory)Overhead (engineering)Matching (statistics)Focus (optics)Theoretical computer scienceData structureAlgorithmData miningMathematicsProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the growing importance of XML in data exchange, much research has been done in providing flexible query mechanisms to extract data from XML documents. In this paper, we focus on the query evaluation in an XML streaming environment, in which data streams arrive continuously and queries have to be evaluated even before all the data of an XML document are available. Two algorithms will be discussed. One is for the unordered tree matching, by which only ancestor-descendant and parent-child relationships are considered. It requires O(|T'|⋅leafQ) time, where T' is a subtree of document tree T, in which each node matches at least one node in query Q and leafQ is the number of leaf nodes in Q. The other is for the ordered tree matching, by which the left-to-right order of nodes must also be taken into account. It runs in O(|T'|⋅|Q|) time. Furthermore, our algorithms achieve high time performance without trading off space requirements. They have the same caching space and buffering space overhead as state-of-the-art stream-querying algorithm. We show the efficiency and effectiveness of our algorithms by a lot of experiments.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.006
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Computer Science and Artificial IntelligenceSame topicAdvanced Database Systems and QueriesFrench-language works237,207