MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2907125844 · doi:10.4230/lipics.icdt.2019.9

Categorical Range Reporting with Frequencies

2019· article· en· W2907125844 on OpenAlexaff
Arnab Ganguly, J. Ian Munro, Yakov Nekrich, Rahul Shah, Sharma V. Thankachan

Bibliographic record

VenueDROPS (Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRange (aeronautics)Categorical variableComputer scienceMachine learningEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we consider a variant of the color range reporting problem called color reporting with frequencies. Our goal is to pre-process a set of colored points into a data structure, so that given a query range Q, we can report all colors that appear in Q, along with their respective frequencies. In other words, for each reported color, we also output the number of times it occurs in Q. We describe an external-memory data structure that uses O(N(1+log^2D/log N)) words and answers one-dimensional queries in O(1 +K/B) I/Os, where N is the total number of points in the data structure, D is the total number of colors in the data structure, K is the number of reported colors, and B is the block size. Next we turn to an approximate version of this problem: report all colors sigma that appear in the query range; for every reported color, we provide a constant-factor approximation on its frequency. We consider color reporting with approximate frequencies in two dimensions. Our data structure uses O(N) space and answers two-dimensional queries in O(log_B N +log^*B + K/B) I/Os in the special case when the query range is bounded on two sides. As a corollary, we can also answer one-dimensional approximate queries within the same time and space bounds.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.060
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.060
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.008
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.018
Open science0.0060.007
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.242
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 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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDROPS (Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics)Same topicData Management and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207