MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1517171740 · doi:10.1109/infocom.2015.7218516

Real-time failure prediction in online services

2015· article· en· W1517171740 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammed Q. Shatnawi, Mohamed Hefeeda

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware System Performance and Reliability
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceService (business)Predictive modellingState (computer science)Real-time computingData miningMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current data mining techniques used to create failure predictors for online services require massive amounts of data to build, train, and test the predictors. These operations are tedious, time consuming, and are not done in real-time. Also, the accuracy of the resulting predictor is highly compromised by changes that affect the environment and working conditions of the predictor. We propose a new approach to creating a dynamic failure predictor for online services in real-time and keeping its accuracy high during the services run-time changes. We use synthetic transactions during the run-time lifecycle to generate current data about the service. This data is used in its ephemeral state to build, train, test, and maintain an up-to-date failure predictor. We implemented the proposed approach in a large-scale online ad service that processes billions of requests each month in six data centers distributed in three continents. We show that the proposed predictor is able to maintain failure prediction accuracy as high as 86% during online service changes, whereas the accuracy of the state-of-the-art predictors may drop to less than 10%.

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)0.010
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations21
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware System Performance and ReliabilityFrench-language works237,207