Authors in alphabetical order by last name.

beautiful.txt

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+What you see as ugly in your life, someone else might see as beautiful.

intro.tex

@@ -2,6 +2,8 @@
 
 \section{Introduction}
 
+
+
 In practice, modern production databases, e.g., Postgres, Oracle, etc. use bag semantics.  In contrast, most implementations of modern probabilistic databases (PDBs) are built in the setting of set semantics, and this contributes to slow computation time. When we consider PDBs in the bag setting, it is then the case that each tuple is annotated with a polynomial, which describes the tuples contributing to the given tuple's presence in the output.  The polynomial is composed of $+$ and $\times$ operators, with constants from the set $\mathbb{N}$ and variables from the set of variables $\vct{X}$.  The polynomial is an encoding of the multiplicity of the tuple in the output, while in general, as we allude later one, the polynomial can also represent set semantics, access levels, and other encodings.  Should we attempt to make computations over the output polynomial, the naive algorithm cannot hope to do better than linear time in the size of the polynomial.  However, in the set semantics setting, when e.g., computing the expectation of the output polynomial given values for each variable in the polynomial's set of variables $\vct{X}$, this problem is \#P-hard. %of the output polynomial of a result tuple for an arbitrary query.  In contrast, in the bag setting, one cannot generate a result better than linear time in the size of the polynomial.
 
 There is limited work and results in the area of bag semantic PDBs.  This work seeks to leverage prior work in factorized databases (e.g. Olteanu et. al.)~\cite{DBLP:conf/tapp/Zavodny11} with PDB implementations to improve efficient computation over output polynomials.  When considering PDBs in the bag setting a subtelty arises that is easily overlooked due to the \textit{oversimplification} of PDBs in the set setting, i.e., in set semantics expectation doesn't have linearity over disjunction, and a consequence of this it is not true in the general case that a compressed polynomial has an equivalent expectation to its DNF form.  In the bag PDB setting, however, expectation does enjoy linearity over addition, and the expectation of a compressed polynomial and its equivalent SOP are indeed the same.

main.tex

@@ -92,14 +92,6 @@ sensitive=true
 
 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
-
-\author{Aaron Huber}
-% \orcid{1234-5678-9012}
-\affiliation{%
-  \institution{University at Buffalo}
-}
-\email{ahuber@buffalo.edu}
-
 \author{Su Feng}
 % \orcid{1234-5678-9012}
 \affiliation{%
@@ -107,13 +99,6 @@ sensitive=true
 }
 \email{sfeng14@hawk.iit.edu}
 
-\author{Atri Rudra}
-% \orcid{1234-5678-9012}
-\affiliation{%
-  \institution{University at Buffalo}
-}
-\email{atri@buffalo.edu}
-
 \author{Boris Glavic}
 % \orcid{1234-5678-9012}
 \affiliation{%
@@ -121,6 +106,13 @@ sensitive=true
 }
 \email{bglavic@iit.edu}
 
+\author{Aaron Huber}
+% \orcid{1234-5678-9012}
+\affiliation{%
+  \institution{University at Buffalo}
+}
+\email{ahuber@buffalo.edu}
+
 \author{Oliver Kennedy}
 % \orcid{1234-5678-9012}
 \affiliation{%
@@ -128,6 +120,17 @@ sensitive=true
 }
 \email{okennedy@buffalo.edu}
 
+\author{Atri Rudra}
+% \orcid{1234-5678-9012}
+\affiliation{%
+  \institution{University at Buffalo}
+}
+\email{atri@buffalo.edu}
+
+
+
+
+
 \begin{document}
 
 \lstset{language=sql}