MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2344932587 · doi:10.1109/cjece.2015.2463753

Using Spatial Semijoins Over Multiple Sites in Distributed Spatial Query Processing

2016· article· en· W2344932587 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Wendy Osborn, Saad Zaamout

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpatial queryJoinsComputer scienceSpatial relationSpatial analysisSpatial databaseSpatial ecologyQuery optimizationDistributed computingData miningInformation retrievalWeb search queryGeographyWeb query classificationSearch engineArtificial intelligenceEcologyRemote sensing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a strategy for geographically distributed spatial query optimization that involves multiple sites. Previous work in the area of geographically distributed spatial query processing and optimization focused only on strategies for performing spatial joins and spatial semijoins, and geographically distributed spatial queries that only involve two sites. We propose a strategy for optimizing a geographically distributed spatial query, which uses spatial semijoins and can involve any number of sites in a geographically distributed spatial database. It identifies and initiates spatial semijoins from the smaller spatial relations in order to reduce the larger spatial relations. By doing so, the data transmission and I/O costs are significantly reduced. We compare the performance of our strategy against the naïve approach of shipping entire spatial relations to the query site. We find that our optimized strategy minimizes the data transmission cost and I/O cost in all cases, and significantly in specific situations. In addition, the CPU cost is not significantly affected by our strategy.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Electrical and Computer EngineeringSame topicData Management and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207