Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents the design and implementation of a new open-source view-based graph analytics system called Graphsurge. Graphsurge is designed to support applications that analyze multiple snapshots or views of a large-scale graph. Users program Graphsurge through a declarative graph view definition language (GVDL) to create views over input graphs and a Differential Dataflow-based programming API to write analytics computations. A key feature of GVDL is the ability to organize views into view collections, which allows Graphsurge to automatically share computation across views, without users writing any incrementalization code, by performing computations differentially. We then introduce two optimization problems that naturally arise in our setting. First is the collection ordering problem to determine the order of views that leads to minimum differences across consecutive views. We prove this problem is NP-hard and show a constant-factor approximation algorithm drawn from literature. Second is the collection splitting problem to decide on which views to run computations differentially vs from scratch, for which we present an adaptive solution that makes decisions at runtime. We present extensive experiments to demonstrate the benefits of running computations differentially for view collections and our collection ordering and splitting optimizations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.037 | 0.015 |
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".