Combining Vertex-Centric Graph Processing with SPARQL for Large-Scale RDF Data Analytics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modern applications require sophisticated analytics on RDF graphs that combine structural queries with generic graph computations. Existing systems support either declarative SPARQL queries, or generic graph processing, but not both. We bridge the gap by introducing Spartex, a versatile framework for complex RDF analytics. Spartex extends SPARQL to combine seamlessly generic graph algorithms (e.g., PageRank, Shortest Paths, etc.) with SPARQL queries. Spartex builds on existing vertex-centric graph processing frameworks, such as Graphlab or Pregel. It implements a generic SPARQL operator as a vertex-centric program that interprets SPARQL queries and executes them efficiently using a built-in optimizer. In addition, any graph algorithm implemented in the underlying vertex-centric framework, can be executed in Spartex. We present various scenarios where our framework simplifies significantly the implementation of complex RDF data analytics programs. We demonstrate that Spartex scales to datasets with billions of edges, and show that our core SPARQL engine is at least as fast as the state-of-the-art specialized RDF engines. For complex analytical tasks that combine generic graph processing with SPARQL, Spartex is at least an order of magnitude faster than existing alternatives.
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 | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".