MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W31006655 · doi:10.3233/bd-180350

Storage and Indexing of Relational OLAP Views with Mixed Categorical and Continuous Dimensions

2007· article· en· W31006655 on OpenAlexaff
Oliver Baltzer, Andrew Rau‐Chaplin, Norbert Zeh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Digital Information Management · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCategorical variableOnline analytical processingComputer scienceSearch engine indexingData miningDimension (graph theory)Feature (linguistics)Cardinality (data modeling)Data warehouseRelational databaseData cubeSpatial analysisInformation retrievalDatabaseMachine learningMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Journal of Digital Information Management ABSTRACT: Due to the widespread adoption of location-based services and other spatial applications, data warehouses that store spatial information are becoming increasingly prevalent. Consequently, it is becoming important to extend the standard OLAP paradigm with features that support spatial analysis and aggregation. While traditional OLAP systems are limited to data characterized by strictly categorical feature dimensions, Spatial OLAP systems must provide support for both categorical and spatial feature dimensions. Such spatial feature dimensions are typically represented by continuous data values. In this paper we propose a technique for representing and indexing relational OLAP views with mixed categorical and continuous data. Our method builds on top of an established mechanism for standard OLAP and exploits characteristic properties of space-filling curves. It allows us to effectively represent and index mixed categorical and continuous data, while dynamically adapting to changes in dimension cardinality during updates. We have implemented the proposed storage and indexing methods and evaluated their build, update, and query times using both synthetic and real datasets. Our experiments show that the proposed methods based on Hilbert curves of dynamic resolutions offers significant performance advantages especially for view updates. Categories and Subject Descriptors H.3.1[Content analysis and indexing]; E.1 [Data Structures]

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.008
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.210 · 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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Digital Information ManagementSame topicData Management and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207