Orthogonal Point Location and Rectangle Stabbing Queries in 3-d
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this work, we present a collection of new results on two fundamental problems in geometric data structures: orthogonal point location and rectangle stabbing.\n- Orthogonal point location. We give the first linear-space data structure that supports 3-d point location queries on n disjoint axis-aligned boxes with optimal O(log n) query time in the (arithmetic) pointer machine model. This improves the previous O(log^{3/2} n) bound of Rahul [SODA 2015]. We similarly obtain the first linear-space data structure in the I/O model with optimal query cost, and also the first linear-space data structure in the word RAM model with sub-logarithmic query time.\n- Rectangle stabbing. We give the first linear-space data structure that supports 3-d 4-sided and 5-sided rectangle stabbing queries in optimal O(log_wn+k) time in the word RAM model. We similarly obtain the first optimal data structure for the closely related problem of 2-d top-k rectangle stabbing in the word RAM model, and also improved results for 3-d 6-sided rectangle stabbing.\nFor point location, our solution is simpler than previous methods, and is based on an interesting variant of the van Emde Boas recursion, applied in a round-robin fashion over the dimensions, combined with bit-packing techniques. For rectangle stabbing, our solution is a variant of Alstrup, Brodal, and Rauhe's grid-based recursive technique (FOCS 2000), combined with a number of new ideas.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.006 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".