MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380591158 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3040379/v1

Simplified Algorithms for Order-Based CoreMaintenance

2023· preprint· en· W4380591158 on OpenAlexaff
Bin Guo, Emil Sekerinski

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGraph Theory and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorrectnessEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionComputer scienceTime complexityOrder (exchange)AlgorithmGraphAnalyticsTheoretical computer scienceData miningArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<title>Abstract</title> Graph analytics attract much attention from both research and industry communities. Due to its linear time complexity, the $k$-core decomposition is widely used in many real-world applications such as biology, social networks, community detection, ecology, and information spreading. In many such applications, the data graphs continuously change over time. The changes correspond to edge insertion and removal. Instead of recomputing the $k$-core, which is time-consuming, we study how to maintain the $k$-core efficiently. That is, when inserting or deleting an edge, we need to identify the affected vertices by searching for more vertices. The state-of-the-art order-based method maintains an order, the so-called $k$-order, among all vertices, which can significantly reduce the searching space. However, this order-based method is complicated to understand and implement, and its correctness is not formally discussed.In this work, we propose a simplified order-based approach by introducing the classical Order Data Structure to maintain the $k$-order, which significantly improves the worst-case time complexity for both edge insertion and removal algorithms. Also, our simplified method is intuitive to understand and implement; it is easy to argue the correctness formally. Additionally, we discuss a simplified batch insertion approach.The experiments evaluate our simplified method over 12 real and synthetic graphs with billions of vertices. Compared with the existing method, our simplified approach achieves high speedups up to 7.7x and 9.7x for edge insertion and removal, respectively.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.006

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 head0.192
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.236 · 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
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch SquareSame topicGraph Theory and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207