MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1866240378 · doi:10.1002/cpe.3272

Cube data model for multilevel statistics computation of live execution traces

2014· article· en· W1866240378 on OpenAlexaff
Naser Ezzati‐Jivan, Michel Dagenais

Bibliographic record

VenueConcurrency and Computation Practice and Experience · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTime Series Analysis and Forecasting
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTRACE (psycholinguistics)TracingProcess (computing)Data stream miningData miningRange (aeronautics)ArchitectureData cubeProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Execution trace logs are used to analyze system run‐time behaviour and detect problems. Trace analysis tools usually read the input logs and gather either a detailed or brief summary of them to later process and inspect in the analysis steps. However, continuous and lengthy trace streams contained in the live tracing mode make it difficult to indefinitely record all events or even a detailed summary of the whole stream. This situation is further complicated when the system aims to compare different parts of the trace and provide a multilevel and multidimensional analysis. This paper presents an architecture with corresponding data structures and algorithms to process stream events, generate an adequate summary—detailed enough for recent data and succinct enough for old data—and organize them to enable an efficient multilevel and multidimensional analysis, similar to online analytical processing analyses in the database applications. The proposed solution arranges data in a compact manner using interval forms and enables the range queries for any arbitrary time durations. Because this feature makes it possible to compare of different system parameters in different time areas, it significantly influences the system's ability to provide a comprehensive trace analysis. Although the Linux operating system trace logs are used to evaluate the solution, we propose a generic architecture that can be used to summarize various types of stream data. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.009
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.277 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations11
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConcurrency and Computation Practice and ExperienceSame topicTime Series Analysis and ForecastingFrench-language works237,207