Bibliographic record
Abstract
The existing works on spatial keyword search focus on finding a group of spatial objects covering all the query keywords and minimizing the diameter of the group. However, we observe that such a formulation may not address what users need in some application scenarios. In this paper, we introduce a novel spatial keyword cover problem (SK-COVER for short), which aims to identify the group of spatio-textual objects covering all keywords in a query and minimizing a distance cost function that leads to fewer proximate objects in the answer set. We prove that SK-COVER is not only NP-hard but also does not allow an approximation better than O(log m) in polynomial time, where m is the number of query keywords. We establish an O(log m)-approximation algorithm, which is asymptotically optimal in terms of the approximability of SK-COVER. Furthermore, we devise effective accessing strategies and pruning rules to improve the overall efficiency and scalability. In addition to our algorithmic results, we empirically show that our approximation algorithm always achieves the best accuracy, and the efficiency of our algorithm is comparable to a state-of-the-art algorithm that is intended for mCK, a problem similar to yet theoretically easier than SK-COVER.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".