MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2355085396

Research of Indexing for Moving Object

2006· article· en· W2355085396 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ding Xiao-li

Bibliographic record

VenueMicrocomputer applications · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSearch engine indexingQuadtreeComputer scienceVariation (astronomy)Object (grammar)Index (typography)R-treeTree (set theory)Data miningArtificial intelligenceSpatial databaseSpatial analysisMathematicsStatisticsWorld Wide Web
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditional spatial index structures are not appropriate for indexing moving objects because of numerous updating operations.In this work, three main indexes of moving object are proposed and compared.They are R-tree and its variation,Quadtree and its variation and Gridfile and its variation . Moreover,their hybrid structures are proposed ,and the future works of indexing for moving objects are given as well.

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 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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.870
Threshold uncertainty score0.305

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicrocomputer applicationsSame topicData Management and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207