MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791622101 · doi:10.1093/comjnl/bxac182

Two-Dimensional Block Trees

2022· article· en· W2791622101 on OpenAlexaff
Nieves R. Brisaboa, Travis Gagie, Adrián Gómez‐Brandón, Gonzalo Navarro

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Computer Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAlgorithms and Data Compression
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlock (permutation group theory)Adjacency listRaster graphicsExploitComputer scienceTree (set theory)Adjacency matrixRepresentation (politics)Data structureSequence (biology)Theoretical computer scienceSpace (punctuation)Tree structureAlgorithmPattern recognition (psychology)CombinatoricsMathematicsArtificial intelligenceGraph

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Block Tree is a data structure for representing repetitive sequences in compressed space, which reaches space comparable with that of Lempel–Ziv compression while retaining fast direct access to any position in the sequence. In this paper, we generalize Block Trees to two dimensions, in order to exploit repetitive patterns in the representation of images, matrices and other kinds of bidimensional data. We demonstrate the practicality of the two-dimensional Block Trees (2D-BTs) in representing the adjacency matrices of Web graphs, and raster images in GIS applications. For this purpose, we integrate our 2D-BT with the $k^2$-tree—an efficient structure that exploits clustering and sparseness to compress adjacency matrices—so that it also exploits repetitive patterns. Our experiments show that this structure uses 60–80% of the space of the original $k^2$-tree, while being 30% faster to three times slower when accessing cells.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Computer JournalSame topicAlgorithms and Data CompressionFrench-language works237,207