MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1525645311

Cloud Service Level planning under burstiness

2013· article· en· W1525645311 on OpenAlexaff
Anas Youssef, Diwakar Krishnamurthy

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Symposium on Performance Evaluation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Computing and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBurstinessComputer scienceWorkloadScalabilityCloud computingDistributed computingResource allocationService levelCluster analysisCapacity planningService (business)Resource (disambiguation)Computer networkDatabaseMachine learning
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cloud Service Providers (SPs) need tools to help them plan their infrastructure capacity and decide on Service Level Agreements (SLAs) with their customers prior to deploying customer's applications. Existing approaches have not considered several important challenges such as workload burstiness, workload uncertainty, and scalability to large number of applications. This paper proposes a trace-based framework to address these challenges simultaneously. The core of the framework is a novel Resource Allocation Planning (RAP) methodology which allows SPs to take into account workload burstiness in Service Level Planning (SLP). This methodology works in consort with a Monte Carlo simulation technique to systematically consider the impact of workload uncertainty in SLP. Furthermore, we propose a novel burstiness-aware clustering technique that groups applications with similar workload characteristics to improve the scalability of the SLP framework. Results show that our approach can yield near optimal resource allocations and can achieve lower SLO violations with fewer resources than competing approaches, especially for bursty workloads. Furthermore, our proposed clustering technique is able to improve the scalability of our SLP framework without significantly impacting resource allocation accuracy.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Symposium on Performance Evaluation of Computer and Telecommunication SystemsSame topicCloud Computing and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207