Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data.

Daniel DeLayo

dblp:324/0844 · also Daniel R. Delayo · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
5ranked-venue papers
1as first author
5since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0001-7636-0107ORCID · corroborated

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Systems, architecture and hardware · 3 · 1 first-author · 3 since 2021Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1 · 1 since 2021Theory of computation · 1 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Theoretical computer science
1 paper
Graph algorithms and graph theory · 77% Algorithms and data structures · 23%
Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper
Graph data management · 100%

Topics — the 5 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Graph data management › graph processing
streaming graph processing
0.812024
GraphZeppelin: How to Find Connected Components (Even When Graphs Are Dense, Dynamic, and Massive) · ACM Trans. Database Syst. 2024
Graph algorithms and graph theory › graph connectivity
connected components
0.812024
GraphZeppelin: How to Find Connected Components (Even When Graphs Are Dense, Dynamic, and Massive) · ACM Trans. Database Syst. 2024
Graph algorithms and graph theory
graph connectivity
0.812024
GraphZeppelin: How to Find Connected Components (Even When Graphs Are Dense, Dynamic, and Massive) · ACM Trans. Database Syst. 2024
Algorithms and data structures › sketching
linear sketches
0.212024
GraphZeppelin: How to Find Connected Components (Even When Graphs Are Dense, Dynamic, and Massive) · ACM Trans. Database Syst. 2024
Algorithms and data structures › data streams
streaming algorithms
0.212024
GraphZeppelin: How to Find Connected Components (Even When Graphs Are Dense, Dynamic, and Massive) · ACM Trans. Database Syst. 2024

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

streaming algorithms · 1.5linear sketching data structures · 1.5
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Exploring the Landscape of Distributed Graph Sketching
abstract
Recent work has initiated the study of dense graph processing using graph sketching methods, which drastically reduce space costs by lossily compressing information about the input graph. In this paper, we explore the strange and surprising performance landscape of sketching algorithms. We highlight both their surprising advantages for processing dense graphs that were previously prohibitively expensive to study, as well as the current limitations of the technique. Most notably, we show how sketching can avoid bottlenecks that limit conventional graph processing methods.
David Tench, Evan West, Kenny Zhang, Michael A. Bender, Daniel DeLayo, Martin Farach-Colton, Gilvir Gill, Tyler Seip, Victor Zhang
ALENEX5
2025 Don't Melt Your Cache: Low-Associativity with Heat-Sink
abstract
Perhaps the most influential result in the theory of caches is the following theorem due to Sleator and Tarjan: With O(1) resource augmentation, the basic LRU eviction policy is guaranteed to be O(1)-competitive with the optimal offline policy.
Michael A. Bender, Alexander Conway 0001, Daniel DeLayo, Martin Farach-Colton, Jaehyun Han, Linfeng He, Rob Johnson 0001, Sudarsun Kannan, William Kuszmaul, Donald E. Porter, Evan West
SPAA3
2024 GraphZeppelin: How to Find Connected Components (Even When Graphs Are Dense, Dynamic, and Massive)
abstract
Finding the connected components of a graph is a fundamental problem with uses throughout computer science and engineering. The task of computing connected components becomes more difficult when graphs are very large, or when they are dynamic, meaning the edge set changes over time subject to a stream of edge insertions and deletions. A natural approach to computing the connected components problem on a large, dynamic graph stream is to buy enough RAM to store the entire graph. However, the requirement that the graph fit in RAM is an inherent limitation of this approach and is prohibitive for very large graphs. Thus, there is an unmet need for systems that can process dense dynamic graphs, especially when those graphs are larger than available RAM. We present a new high-performance streaming graph-processing system for computing the connected components of a graph. This system, which we call GraphZeppelin , uses new linear sketching data structures ( CubeSketch ) to solve the streaming connected components problem and as a result requires space asymptotically smaller than the space required for a lossless representation of the graph. GraphZeppelin is optimized for massive dense graphs: GraphZeppelin can process millions of edge updates (both insertions and deletions) per second, even when the underlying graph is far too large to fit in available RAM. As a result GraphZeppelin vastly increases the scale of graphs that can be processed.
David Tench, Evan West, Victor Zhang, Michael A. Bender, Abiyaz Chowdhury, Daniel DeLayo, J. Ahmed Dellas, Martin Farach-Colton, Tyler Seip, Kenny Zhang
ACM Trans. Database Syst.6
2023 Increment - and - Freeze: Every Cache, Everywhere, All of the Time
abstract
One of the most basic algorithmic problems concerning caches is to compute the LRU hit-rate curve on a given trace. Unfortunately, the known algorithms exhibit poor data locality and fail to scale to large caches. It is widely believed that the LRU hit-rate curve cannot be computed efficiently enough to be used in online production settings. This has led to a large literature on heuristics that aim to approximate the curve efficiently.
Michael A. Bender, Daniel DeLayo, Bradley C. Kuszmaul, William Kuszmaul, Evan West
SPAA2
2022 Automatic HBM Management: Models and Algorithms
abstract
Some past and future supercomputer nodes incorporate High- Bandwidth Memory (HBM). Compared to standard DRAM, HBM has similar latency, higher bandwidth and lower capacity.
Daniel DeLayo, Kenny Zhang, Kunal Agrawal 0001, Michael A. Bender, Jonathan W. Berry, Rathish Das, Benjamin Moseley, Cynthia A. Phillips
SPAA1