Cost-Minimizing Online VM Purchasing for Application Service Providers with Arbitrary Demands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent years witness the proliferation of Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS) cloud services, which provide on-demand resources (CPU, RAM, disk) in the form of virtual machines (VMs) for hosting applications/services of third parties. Given the state-of-the-art IaaS offerings, it is still a problem of fundamental importance how the Application Service Providers (ASPs) should rent VMs from the clouds to serve their application needs, in order to minimize the cost while meeting their job demands over a long run. Cloud providers offer different pricing options to meet computing requirements of a variety of applications. However, the challenge facing an ASP is how these pricing options can be dynamically combined to serve arbitrary demands at the optimal cost. In this paper, we propose an online VM purchasing algorithm based on the Lyapunov optimization technique, for minimizing the long-term-averaged VM rental cost of an ASP with time-varying and delay-tolerant workloads, while bounding the maximum response delay of its jobs. In stark contrast with the existing studies, the proposed algorithm enables an ASP to optimally decide the amount of reserved, on-demand and spot instances to purchase simultaneously. Rigorous analysis shows that our algorithm can achieve a time-averaged resource cost close to the offline optimum. Trace-driven simulations further verify the efficacy of our algorithm.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".