MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387098977 · doi:10.1007/s00778-023-00814-z

A survey on transactional stream processing

2023· article· en· W4387098977 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Shuhao Zhang, Juan Soto, Volker Markl

Bibliographic record

VenueThe VLDB Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Database Systems and Queries
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBanting and Best Diabetes Centre, University of TorontoSingapore University of Technology and DesignNational Research FoundationDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungInfo-communications Media Development AuthorityNational Research Foundation SingaporeBundesministerium für Bildung, Wissenschaft, Forschung und TechnologieTechnische Universität Berlin
KeywordsTransactional leadershipTransactional analysisComputer sciencePerspective (graphical)Stream processingData scienceTransaction processingDatabase transactionDistributed computingDatabaseArtificial intelligenceManagementEconomicsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Transactional stream processing (TSP) strives to create a cohesive model that merges the advantages of both transactional and stream-oriented guarantees. Over the past decade, numerous endeavors have contributed to the evolution of TSP solutions, uncovering similarities and distinctions among them. Despite these advances, a universally accepted standard approach for integrating transactional functionality with stream processing remains to be established. Existing TSP solutions predominantly concentrate on specific application characteristics and involve complex design trade-offs. This survey intends to introduce TSP and present our perspective on its future progression. Our primary goals are twofold: to provide insights into the diverse TSP requirements and methodologies, and to inspire the design and development of groundbreaking TSP systems.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.014
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations17
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe VLDB JournalSame topicAdvanced Database Systems and QueriesFrench-language works237,207