MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2519264255 · doi:10.1145/2938503.2938549

The Hilbert PDC-tree

2016· article· en· W2519264255 on OpenAlexafffund
David Robillard, Frank Dehne, Andrew Rau‐Chaplin, Neil Burke

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityCarleton University
FundersCenter for Advanced Study, University of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceTree (set theory)Search engine indexingOverhead (engineering)Hilbert curveAlgorithmTree structureR-treeRectangleTheoretical computer scienceMathematicsBinary treeCombinatoricsArtificial intelligenceSpatial databaseStatisticsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fast aggregation of data with many dimensions is a key component of many applications. The R-tree is the traditional data structure for indexing multi-dimensional data, but even the best R-tree variants suffer from performance degradation as the number of dimensions increases. The DC-tree addressed this issue by replacing Minimum Bounding Rectangle (MBR) keys with Minimum Describing Subsets (MDSs), which are less susceptible to overlap. This technique dramatically improves query performance with many dimensions, but at the cost of reduced insertion performance. Like most R-tree variants, this insertion overhead comes from expensive geometric comparisons while selecting the best child for insertion, or splitting over-full nodes. DC-trees, including the parallel PDC-tree, suffer even more from this overhead since MDSs are typically much more expensive to compare and manipulate than MBRs. This paper introduces the Hilbert PDC-tree, a parallel index structure for many-dimensional data that supports high-velocity data ingestion. This is achieved by avoiding geometric comparisons during insertion by instead inserting records based on the Hilbert index of their keys. This approach is similar to that of the Hilbert R-tree, but with special considerations for efficiently supporting many hierarchical dimensions. Additionally, a new node splitting algorithm significantly reduces overlap and improves query performance. Experiments show that the Hilbert PDC-tree scales well to a high number of dimensions, while supporting a much higher rate of ingestion and better query performance than the PDC-tree.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.920
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.212
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicData Management and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207