Optimizing subgraph queries by combining binary and worst-case optimal joins
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study the problem of optimizing subgraph queries using the new worst-case optimal join plans. Worst-case optimal plans evaluate queries by matching one query vertex at a time using multi-way intersections. The core problem in optimizing worst-case optimal plans is to pick an ordering of the query vertices to match. We design a cost-based optimizer that (i) picks efficient query vertex orderings for worst-case optimal plans; and (ii) generates hybrid plans that mix traditional binary joins with worst-case optimal style multiway intersections. Our cost metric combines the cost of binary joins with a new cost metric called intersection-cost . The plan space of our optimizer contains plans that are not in the plan spaces based on tree decompositions from prior work. In addition to our optimizer, we describe an adaptive technique that changes the orderings of the worst-case optimal subplans during query execution. We demonstrate the effectiveness of the plans our optimizer picks and the effectiveness of the adaptive technique through extensive experiments. Our optimizer is integrated into the Graphflow DBMS.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it