MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W142955027

Proactive and Reactive Resource Allocation

2002· article· en· W142955027 on OpenAlexaff
Joseph K. Cross, Patrick Lardieri

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReal-Time Systems Scheduling
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResource allocationResource (disambiguation)Resource management (computing)Computer scienceDistributed computingComputer network
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resources, such as processors and network bandwidth, are allocated to application and common services. In long-running systems, it is common to re-allocate these resources, due to changing mission requirements or to changing resource availability. Two patterns of resource allocation are described in this paper: reactive resource allocation, which begins when the need for reallocation arises, and proactive resource allocation, which is planned before the need arises. Reactive resource allocation is widely used in both commercial and United States Department of Defense (DoD) distributed real-time and embedded (DRE) systems. In addition, reactive resource allocation is the focus of a vigorous research and development community. Proactive resource allocation, on the other hand, seems to be employed primarily, if not exclusively, in DRE systems, where in some cases it provides the only means to meet real-time response and recovery requirements. Reactive Resource Allocation The Reactive Resource Allocation design pattern maintains the performance of a computing system within required bounds by observing when the system's performance is close to crossing, or has crossed, a threshold; determining how best to reallocate the available resources to prevent or correct any requirement violation; and then directing that resource reallocation.

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)0.006
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.004

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations3
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReal-Time Systems SchedulingFrench-language works237,207