On Evaluation of Graph Pattern Matching in Large Databases
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
Recently, graph databases have been received much attention in the research community due to their extensive applications in practice, such as social networks, biological networks and World Wide Web, which bring forth a lot of challenging data management problems including subgraph search, shortest-path queries, reachability verification, pattern matching, and so on. Among them, the graph pattern matching is to find all matches in a data graph G for a given pattern graph Q and is more general and flexible compared with other problems mentioned above. In this paper, we address a kind of graph matching, the so-called graph matching with d, by which an edge in Q is allowed to match a path of length ≤ δ in G. In order to reduce the search space when exploring G to find matches, we propose a new index structure and a novel pruning technique to eliminate a lot of unqualified vertices before join operations are carried out. Extensive experiments have been conducted, which show that our approach makes great improvements in running time compared to existing ones.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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