MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Intersection Representation of Big Data Networks and Triangle Counting

2021· article· en· W4205541117 on OpenAlex
Wali Mohammad Abdullah, David Awosoga, Shahadat Hossain

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

Venue2021 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicComplex Network Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceIntersection (aeronautics)EnumerationScalabilityData structureRepresentation (politics)Theoretical computer scienceCluster analysisSet (abstract data type)Enhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionBig dataAlgorithmData miningMathematicsCombinatoricsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Triangles are an essential part of network analysis, representing metrics such as transitivity ratio and clustering coefficient Because of its diverse applications, enumeration and counting of triangles in large networks has been extensively studied, and continues to draw much interest from many different fields. This has only increased with the introduction of approximate counting, parallel and distributed implementations, and restricted and streaming data access scenarios. We propose a compact and efficient representation of network data based on the intersection of edge labels, and use sparse matrix data structures for its computer implementation. We then present a scalable algorithm that uses this structure to count triangles. On a set of large (the largest with more that 3.6 billion edges) real-world and synthetic networks, our algorithm performs significantly better than the reference implementation miniTri [1].

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.931
Threshold uncertainty score0.945

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.339
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.044 · 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