MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2996401364 · doi:10.1145/3434391

Scalable Pattern Matching in Metadata Graphs via Constraint Checking

2021· preprint· en· W2996401364 on OpenAlexaff
Tahsin Reza, Hassan H. Halawa, Matei Ripeanu, Geoffrey Sanders, Roger Pearce

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Parallel Computing · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGraph Theory and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersLawrence Livermore National LaboratoryU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsComputer scienceScalabilityTheoretical computer scienceVertex (graph theory)Iterated functionGraphDatabaseMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pattern matching is a fundamental tool for answering complex graph queries. Unfortunately, existing solutions have limited capabilities: They do not scale to process large graphs and/or support only a restricted set of search templates or usage scenarios. Moreover, the algorithms at the core of the existing techniques are not suitable for today’s graph processing infrastructures relying on horizontal scalability and shared-nothing clusters, as most of these algorithms are inherently sequential and difficult to parallelize. We present an algorithmic pipeline that bases pattern matching on constraint checking . The key intuition is that each vertex and edge participating in a match has to meet a set of constraints implicitly specified by the search template. These constraints can be verified independently and typically are less expensive to compute than searching the full template. The pipeline we propose generates these constraints and iterates over them to eliminate all the vertices and edges that do not participate in any match, thus reducing the background graph to a subgraph that is the union of all template matches—the complete set of all vertices and edges that participate in at least one match. Additional analysis can be performed on this annotated, reduced graph, such as full match enumeration, match counting, or computing vertex/edge centrality. Furthermore, a vertex-centric formulation for constraint checking algorithms exists, and this makes it possible to harness existing high-performance, vertex-centric graph processing frameworks. This technique (i) enables highly scalable pattern matching in metadata (labeled) graphs; (ii) supports arbitrary patterns with 100% precision; (iii) enables tradeoffs between precision and time-to-solution, while always selects all vertices and edges that participate in matches, thus offering 100% recall; and (iv) supports a set of popular data analytics scenarios. We implement our approach on top of HavoqGT, an open-source asynchronous graph processing framework, and demonstrate its advantages through strong and weak scaling experiments on massive scale real-world (up to 257 billion edges) and synthetic (up to 4.4 trillion edges) labeled graphs, respectively, and at scales (1,024 nodes / 36,864 cores), orders of magnitude larger than used in the past for similar problems. This article serves two purposes: First, it synthesises the knowledge accumulated during a long-term project [Reza et al. 2017, 2018; Tripoul et al. 2018]. Second, it presents new system features, usage scenarios, optimizations, and comparisons with related work that strengthen the confidence that pattern matching based on iterative pruning via constraint checking is an effective and scalable approach in practice. The new contributions include the following: (i) We demonstrate the ability of the constraint checking approach to efficiently support two additional search scenarios that often emerge in practice, interactive incremental search and exploratory search . (ii) We empirically compare our solution with two additional state-of-the-art systems, Arabsque [Teixeira et al. 2015] and TriAD [Gurajada et al. 2014]. (iii) We show the ability of our solution to accommodate a more diverse range of datasets with varying properties, e.g., scale, skewness, label distribution, and match frequency. (iv) We introduce or extend a number of system features (e.g., work aggregation, load balancing, and the ability to cap the generated traffic) and design optimizations and demonstrate their advantages with respect to improving performance and scalability. (v) We present bottleneck analysis and insights into artifacts that influence performance. (vi) We present a theoretical complexity argument that motivates the performance gains we observe.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.008
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on Parallel ComputingSame topicGraph Theory and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207