223
Benchmarking RL-Enhanced Spatial Indices Against Traditional, Advanced, and Learned Counterparts
arXiv:2512.11161v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Reinforcement learning has recently been used to enhance index structures, giving rise to reinforcement learning-enhanced spatial indices (RLESIs) that aim to improve query efficiency during index construction. However, their practical benefits remain unclear due to the lack of unified implementations and comprehensive evaluations, especially in disk-based settings.
We present the first modular and extensible benchmark for RLESIs. Built on top of an existing spatial index library, our framework decouples index training from building, supports parameter tuning, and enables consistent comparison with traditional, advanced, and learned spatial indices.
We evaluate 12 representative spatial indices across six datasets and diverse workloads, including point, range, kNN, spatial join, and mixed read/write queries. Using latency, I/O, and index statistics as metrics, we find that while RLESIs can reduce query latency with tuning, they consistently underperform learned spatial indices and advanced variants in both query efficiency and index build cost. These findings highlight that although RLESIs offer promising architectural compatibility, their high tuning costs and limited generalization hinder practical adoption.
Abstract: Reinforcement learning has recently been used to enhance index structures, giving rise to reinforcement learning-enhanced spatial indices (RLESIs) that aim to improve query efficiency during index construction. However, their practical benefits remain unclear due to the lack of unified implementations and comprehensive evaluations, especially in disk-based settings.
We present the first modular and extensible benchmark for RLESIs. Built on top of an existing spatial index library, our framework decouples index training from building, supports parameter tuning, and enables consistent comparison with traditional, advanced, and learned spatial indices.
We evaluate 12 representative spatial indices across six datasets and diverse workloads, including point, range, kNN, spatial join, and mixed read/write queries. Using latency, I/O, and index statistics as metrics, we find that while RLESIs can reduce query latency with tuning, they consistently underperform learned spatial indices and advanced variants in both query efficiency and index build cost. These findings highlight that although RLESIs offer promising architectural compatibility, their high tuning costs and limited generalization hinder practical adoption.
Anonymous
No comments yet.