MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792692675 · doi:10.1049/iet-com.2017.1093

Enhanced Bloom filter utilisation scheme for string matching using a splitting approach

2018· article· en· W2792692675 on OpenAlexafffund
Shervin Vakili, J. M. Pierre Langlois, Yvon Savaria, Naraig Manjikian

Bibliographic record

VenueIET Communications · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCaching and Content Delivery
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBloom filterComputer scienceBloomMatching (statistics)Filter (signal processing)Scheme (mathematics)String (physics)AlgorithmMathematical optimizationMathematicsStatisticsBiologyEcologyMathematical analysisComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bloom filters (BFs) are widely utilised to speed up string matching in crucial network applications such as real‐time intrusion detection and spam filters. This study introduces a new approach to improve the efficiency of BFs for string matching functions. The approach splits each target string into two substrings and considers the second substring for programming the BF. The objective is to minimise the false positive rate by maximising the common hash signatures from the second substring. Results show that compared to the traditional means of using BFs, the proposed approach reduces the false positive rate by averages of 76 and 88% for 32 and 64 Kb BFs, respectively. Moreover, a complete string matching architecture has been developed in hardware based on the proposed approach. Results demonstrate the advantages of this new architecture compared to similar previous works.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score0.615

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.212 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIET CommunicationsSame topicCaching and Content DeliveryFrench-language works237,207