MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406162498 · doi:10.1007/s10619-024-07452-6

Indexing temporal relations for range-duration queries

2025· article· en· W4406162498 on OpenAlexaff
Matteo Ceccarello, Anton Dignös, Johann Gamper, Christina Khnaisser

Bibliographic record

VenueDistributed and Parallel Databases · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersUniversità degli Studi di Padova
KeywordsSearch engine indexingComputer scienceData structureRange (aeronautics)Duration (music)Information retrievalData miningProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Temporal information plays a crucial role in many database applications, however support for queries on such data is limited. We present an index structure, termed RD-index , to support range-duration queries over interval timestamped relations, which constrain both the range of the tuples’ positions on the timeline and their duration . RD-index is a grid structure in the two-dimensional space, representing the position on the timeline and the duration of timestamps, respectively. Instead of using a regular grid, we consider the data distribution for the construction of the grid in order to ensure that each grid cell contains approximately the same number of intervals. RD-index features provable bounds on the running time of all the operations, allows for a simple implementation, supports very predictable query performance, and can be constructed and queried in parallel using multithreading. We benchmark our solution on a variety of datasets and query workloads, investigating both the query rate and the behavior of the individual queries. The results show that RD-index performs better than the baselines on range-duration queries, for which it is explicitly designed. Furthermore, it outperforms state of the art indexes also on mixed workloads containing queries that constrain either only the duration or the range along with range-duration queries. Finally, the size of the RD-index is in all settings smaller than the competitors, its construction scales with the number of threads, and parallelization helps improving the runtime of expensive moderate and lowly selective queries.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.008
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDistributed and Parallel DatabasesSame topicData Management and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207