Fast Preprocessing for Optimal Orthogonal Range Reporting and Range Successor with Applications to Text Indexing
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
Under the word RAM model, we design three data structures that can be constructed in $O(n\sqrt{\lg n})$ time over $n$ points in an $n \times n$ grid. The first data structure is an $O(n\lg^ε n)$-word structure supporting orthogonal range reporting in $O(\lg\lg n+k)$ time, where $k$ denotes output size and $ε$ is an arbitrarily small constant. The second is an $O(n\lg\lg n)$-word structure supporting orthogonal range successor in $O(\lg\lg n)$ time, while the third is an $O(n\lg^ε n)$-word structure supporting sorted range reporting in $O(\lg\lg n+k)$ time. The query times of these data structures are optimal when the space costs must be within $O(n\ polylog\ n)$ words. Their exact space bounds match those of the best known results achieving the same query times, and the $O(n\sqrt{\lg n})$ construction time beats the previous bounds on preprocessing. Previously, among 2d range search structures, only the orthogonal range counting structure of Chan and Pǎtraşcu (SODA 2010) and the linear space, $O(\lg^ε n)$ query time structure for orthogonal range successor by Belazzougui and Puglisi (SODA 2016) can be built in the same $O(n\sqrt{\lg n})$ time. Hence our work is the first that achieve the same preprocessing time for optimal orthogonal range reporting and range successor. We also apply our results to improve the construction time of text indexes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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