MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1587827299 · doi:10.1109/icsmc.2005.1571578

Understanding the Performance of Enterprise Applications

2006· article· en· W1587827299 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware System Performance and Reliability
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceServerVendorSuiteComponent (thermodynamics)Enterprise information systemBandwidth (computing)World Wide WebDatabaseComputer networkBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Companies have gradually abandoned internally developed enterprise applications in favor of commercial ones. These systems are often comprised of different, multi-vendor components, including, Web servers, databases and applications. For most organizations, performance problems are often addressed by acquiring larger servers or increasing network bandwidth. While the performance of an individual component or application can be and is analyzed, the overall performance of the integrated suite of applications remains largely ad hoc and determining the cause of problems becomes trial and error. We report on initial work to address these problems by studying a commercial enterprise application, understanding what information is important, how such information can be gathered and analyzed and what kinds of tools would be beneficial. We report on an analysis tool and some results of using that tool and on the potential of the approach and methodology for larger enterprise environments.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.915
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.205 · 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