MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3193434541 · doi:10.3929/ethz-b-000504426

The Future is Big Graphs! A Community View on Graph Processing Systems

2020· article· en· W3193434541 on OpenAlexaff
Sherif Sakr, Angela Bonifati, Hannes Voigt, Alexandru Iosup, Khaled Ammar, Renzo Angles, Walid G. Aref, Marcelo Arenas, Maciej Besta, Peter Boncz, Khuzaima Daudjee, Emanuele Della Valle, Stefania Dumbrava, Olaf Hartig, Bernhard Haslhofer, Tim Hegeman, Jan Hidders, Katja Hose, Adriana Iamnitchi, Vasiliki Kalavri, Hugo Kapp, Wim Martens, M. TAMER ÖZSU, Eric Peukert, Stefan Plantikow, Mohamed Ragab, Matei Ripeanu, Semih Salihoğlu, Christian Schulz, Petra Selmer, Juan Sequeda, Joshua Shinavier, Gábor Szárnyas, Riccardo Tommasini, Antonino Tumeo, Alexandru Uta, Ana Lucia Vărbănescu, Hsiang‐Yun Wu, Nikolay Yakovets, Da Yan, Eiko Yoneki

Bibliographic record

VenueRepository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Database Systems and Queries
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceBig dataGraph algorithmsGraph databaseGraphSQLRelational database management systemData scienceTheoretical computer scienceDatabaseDistributed computingWorld Wide WebRelational databaseOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Graphs are by nature unifying abstractions that can leverage interconnectedness to represent, explore, predict, and explain real- and digital-world phenomena. Although real users and consumers of graph instances and graph workloads understand these abstractions, future problems will require new abstractions and systems. What needs to happen in the next decade for big graph processing to continue to succeed?

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.008
Science and technology studies0.0030.014
Scholarly communication0.0140.053
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0060.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.199
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations13
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRepository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich)Same topicAdvanced Database Systems and QueriesFrench-language works237,207