MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384303994 · doi:10.1109/access.2023.3295434

On Nonlinear Learned String Indexing

2023· article· en· W4384303994 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAlgorithms and Data Compression
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistero dell'Università e della RicercaUniversità di PisaEuropean CommissionUniversity of TorontoUniversità degli Studi di Milano
KeywordsComputer scienceSearch engine indexingString (physics)Nonlinear systemArtificial intelligenceMathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate the potential of several artificial neural network architectures to be used as an index on a sorted set of strings, namely, as a mapping from a query string to (an estimate of) its lexicographic rank in the set, which allows solving some interesting string-search operations such as range and prefix searches. Our evaluation on a variety of real and synthetic datasets shows that learned models can beat the space vs error trade-off of the classic (possibly compressed) trie-based solutions for relatively dense datasets only, while being slower to be trained and queried. This leads us to conclude that learned models are not yet competitive with classic trie-based solutions, and thus cannot completely replace them, but possibly only integrate them. Although our study does not settle the question conclusively, it highlights appropriate methods, provides a baseline for comparison, and introduces several open problems, thereby serving as a starting point for future research.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.922
Threshold uncertainty score0.382

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.280 · 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