MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2753236721 · doi:10.6000/1927-5129.2017.13.79

Huge and Real-Time Database Systems: A Comparative Study and Review for SQL Server 2016, Oracle 12c & MySQL 5.7 for Personal Computer

2017· article· en· W2753236721 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Khawar Islam, Kamran Ahsan, Syed Abdul Khaliq Bari, Muhammad Saeed, Syed Asim Ali

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Basic & Applied Sciences · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceOracleDatabaseSQLRelational databaseDatabase serverObject (grammar)Data Transformation ServicesRelational database management systemViewDatabase tuningDatabase designWorld Wide WebQuery by ExampleSoftware engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Complexity, and Handling of huge data is a crucial target for all management systems. Databases are the backbone, central and core component of a computer application to store data in a logical way, which define the structure and mechanism for manipulation of data. Many Databases are available for handling and saving huge data including commercial and non-commercial like Microsoft SQL Server, Oracle Database, and MYSQL etc. Many vendors are working on modern techniques of databases spatio-temporal, object-relational, parallel databases etc. This novel research evaluates the comparative study and execution performance of top three databases according to their particular scenario and situation, after reading the paper the computer related experts especially developers easily judge, which database is most reliable in particular scenario, choosing the right decision for development of huge computer applications for hospitals, banks, and industries.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.335
GPT teacher head0.525
Teacher spread0.189 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations8
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Basic & Applied SciencesSame topicArtificial Intelligence in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207