MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1896716077 · doi:10.1109/cjece.2015.2431220

Toward a Unified Characterization of Mapping Algorithms in Cloud and MPSoC Environments Using a Literature-Based Approach

2015· article· en· W1896716077 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Maryam Moghadas, Mahmoud Reza Hashemi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Video Quality Assessment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMPSoCComputer scienceCloud computingMulti-core processorAlgorithmMobile deviceMultiprocessingDistributed computingEmbedded systemParallel computingOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To address the growing demand for high-quality multimedia applications on mobile devices, stronger smartphones based on multicore processors are becoming the mainstream. However, processing power is still behind the required resources for some multimedia applications such as new video coding standards. Mobile cloud computing is a solution for this concern. In order to efficiently distribute tasks onto an infrastructure of devices, a mapping algorithm is required. This algorithm should determine the suitable device in the cloud and should also allocate the corresponding core in the selected multicore device. Providing a suitable algorithm considering the two domains of cloud and Multiprocessor System on Chip (MPSoC) simultaneously is a challenge. Describing the mapping algorithms with a set of descriptive elements makes differentiation among them easier. Unification of these features on both domains results in simpler mapping algorithms. In this paper, we present a generic representation for the mapping algorithms in the MPSoC and cloud environments. Grounded Theory has been applied to identify the main features of the mapping algorithms. The obtained features are organized in more abstract categories based on their similarities. In order to evaluate the results, a few sample mapping algorithms from each of the cloud and MPSoC domains have been successfully characterized with the obtained features.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Electrical and Computer EngineeringSame topicImage and Video Quality AssessmentFrench-language works237,207