MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1485420199 · doi:10.5555/2147671.2147673

MODE: mix driven on-line resource demand estimation

2011· article· en· W1485420199 on OpenAlexaff
Amir Kalbasi, Diwakar Krishnamurthy, Jerry Rolia, Michael M. Richter

Bibliographic record

VenueConference on Network and Service Management · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware System Performance and Reliability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceWorkloadRegressionResource (disambiguation)Regression analysisLinear regressionSupport vector machineResource allocationAbstractionData miningMachine learningStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adaptive performance management solutions often rely on models that require accurate resource demand measures that are estimated in an on-line manner. However it is typically not possible to directly measure resource demands at the abstraction they are needed, e.g., for a software service within an application server that is invoked by a URL. For such cases, linear regression techniques are often used to estimate resource demands. We evaluate the effectiveness of the Least Squares (LSQ) and Least Absolute Deviations (LAD) regression techniques, used extensively by others, as well as Support Vector Regression (SVR) for the purpose of demand estimation. To the best of our knowledge SVR has not yet been evaluated for computer resource demand estimation. We consider the predictive accuracy of these methods for three different real and simulated workloads. Our results demonstrate the importance of tuning the regression parameters of the techniques. We propose an on-line method named Mix Driven On-line Resource Demand Estimation (MODE) that automatically and quickly tunes the regression parameters for LSQ, LAD, and SVR to achieve their best results. The method is novel in that it relies on pre-defined workload mixes with known aggregate demand values to support the tuning exercise. We show that when employed in an on-line manner, tuning with respect to pre-defined mixes is significantly more accurate than the traditional approach of using only step by step data.

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)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations22
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConference on Network and Service ManagementSame topicSoftware System Performance and ReliabilityFrench-language works237,207