Computing the Difference of Conjunctive Queries Efficiently
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigate how to efficiently compute the difference result of two (or multiple) conjunctive queries, which is the last operator in relational algebra to be unraveled. The standard approach in practical database systems is to materialize the results for every input query as a separate set, and then compute the difference of two (or multiple) sets. This approach is bottlenecked by the complexity of evaluating every input query individually, which could be very expensive, particularly when there are only a few results in the difference. In this paper, we introduce a new approach by exploiting the structural property of input queries and rewriting the original query by pushing the difference operator down as much as possible. We show that for a large class of difference queries, this approach can lead to a linear-time algorithm, in terms of the input size and (final) output size, i.e., the number of query results that survive from the difference operator. We complete this result by showing the hardness of computing the remaining difference queries in linear time. Although a linear-time algorithm is hard to achieve in general, we also provide some heuristics that can provably improve the standard approach. At last, we compare our approach with standard SQL engines over graph and benchmark datasets. The experiment results demonstrate order-of-magnitude speedups achieved by our approach over the vanilla SQL engine.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it