MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2759878005 · doi:10.1002/spe.2560

Roaring bitmaps: Implementation of an optimized software library

2018· article· en· W2759878005 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueSoftware Practice and Experience · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Database Systems and Queries
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New BrunswickUniversité TÉLUQUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBitmapOracleMicrosoft Visual StudioSoftwareBenchmark (surveying)Visual Basic for ApplicationsIndex (typography)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Compressed bitmap indexes are used in systems such as Git or Oracle to accelerate queries. They represent sets and often support operations such as unions, intersections, differences, and symmetric differences. Several important systems such as Elasticsearch, Apache Spark, Netflix's Atlas, LinkedIn's Pivot, Metamarkets' Druid, Pilosa, Apache Hive, Apache Tez, Microsoft Visual Studio Team Services, and Apache Kylin rely on a specific type of compressed bitmap index called Roaring. We present an optimized software library written in C implementing Roaring bitmaps: CRoaring. It benefits from several algorithms designed for the single‐instruction–multiple‐data instructions available on commodity processors. In particular, we present vectorized algorithms to compute the intersection, union, difference, and symmetric difference between arrays. We benchmark the library against a wide range of competitive alternatives, identifying weaknesses and strengths in our software. Our work is available under a liberal open‐source license.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.015

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations48
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSoftware Practice and ExperienceSame topicAdvanced Database Systems and QueriesFrench-language works237,207