MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1588330456

Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Virtual execution environments

2006· article· en· W1588330456 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hans‐J. Boehm, David Grove

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Computing and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIBMComputer scienceSteering committeePleasureQuality (philosophy)Library scienceOperations researchWorld Wide WebEngineering managementEngineeringPsychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is our great pleasure to welcome you to the Second International Conference on Virtual Execution Environments -- VEE'06. Interest in virtual execution environments spans the programming language, operating system, and computer architecture communities. The goal of the VEE conference is to provide a single venue to bring together researchers and practitioners from all three of these communities to share their perspectives with others interested in the various aspects of virtual execution environments. This year's VEE is co-located with PLDI 2006 in Ottawa, Ontario and, for the first time, is equally co-sponsored by ACM SIGOPS and ACM SIGPLAN. VEE'07 will be held as part of FCRC in June 2007 and we hope VEE'08 will be co-located with a leading operating systems conference.The call for papers attracted 44 submissions, which was a significant decline from the 65 papers submitted to VEE'05. However, the average quality of the submissions was quite high. We believe that the decision to move the submission deadline significantly earlier (and before the PLDI notification date) was the primary cause of the decline in the number of submissions. The steering committee is reconsidering this decision for future conferences.Every submitted paper was reviewed by three program committee members. Program committee members had the option of asking for input from additional external reviewers when preparing their reviews; 20% of the PC reviews were prepared with the help of external reviewers. The program committee met at IBM Research in Hawthorne, NY on February 14, 2006 -- two days after the largest snowfall in the history of New York City. As a result, only half of the committee was able to successfully travel to New York and attend the meeting in person. However, all of the committee members who were not physically present participated in the meeting via an all day teleconference. The committee accepted 17 excellent papers that cover a wide spectrum of topics related to virtual execution environments. In addition to the technical papers, the program includes keynote talks by James Larus and Leendert van Doorn.

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 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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.966
Threshold uncertainty score0.142

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations10
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCloud Computing and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207