MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3176395835 · doi:10.1145/3461837.3464516

LSQB

2021· article· en· W3176395835 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGraph Theory and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekEuropean Commission
KeywordsComputer scienceBenchmark (surveying)ScalabilityJoinsSubgraph isomorphism problemMatching (statistics)Petascale computingVertex (graph theory)GraphBase (topology)Theoretical computer scienceDatabaseProgramming languageMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce LSQB, a new large-scale subgraph query benchmark. LSQB tests the performance of database management systems on an important class of subgraph queries overlooked by existing benchmarks. Matching a labelled structural graph pattern, referred to as subgraph matching, is the focus of LSQB. In relational terms, the benchmark tests DBMSs' join performance as a choke-point since subgraph matching is equivalent to multi-way joins between base Vertex and base Edge tables on ID attributes. The benchmark focuses on read-heavy workloads by relying on global queries which have been ignored by prior benchmarks. Global queries, also referred to as unseeded queries, are a type of queries that are only constrained by labels on the query vertices and edges. LSQB contains a total of nine queries and leverages the LDBC social network data generator for scalability. The benchmark gained both academic and industrial interest and is used internally by 5+ different vendors.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.771
Threshold uncertainty score0.218

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGraph Theory and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207