MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413968449 · doi:10.14778/3746405.3746413

Locality-Aware Cache Replacement Policy for Graph Traversals

2025· article· en· W4413968449 on OpenAlexaff
Zeynep Korkmaz, M. Tamer Özsu, Khuzaima Daudjee

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the VLDB Endowment · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGraph Theory and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLocalityCacheComputer scienceLocality of referenceGraphParallel computingTheoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many graph processing applications consist of read-only workloads that need to perform low-latency traversals over large graphs. These traversals are inherently expensive, and storage and processing systems need to be optimized for them. The performance of secondary storage-based systems can be improved by caching locality-driven data in memory. Exploring the data reuse of graph objects in applications is important to decrease the page faults in the cache. However, graph applications can suffer from poor access locality, making caching of graph data challenging. Locality can be imposed through graph ordering algorithms that can be exploited by cache replacement algorithms. We propose a graph locality-aware cache replacement policy called LAC that exploits the serialization layout obtained by graph ordering techniques. We show that the spatial locality that is captured on disk pages offers temporal locality for subsequent accesses of cache pages, and this information can be used to make improved cache replacement decisions. We evaluate LAC against the popular GCLOCK algorithm for input graphs with different structural properties while running various query types. Our evaluation shows that LAC can outperform GCLOCK through page fault improvements by reducing latency up to 1.42X in simulation studies and up to 1.23X with integration into the Neo4j system.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the VLDB EndowmentSame topicGraph Theory and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207