MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1912570954 · doi:10.1109/iccac.2015.29

End-to-End QoS Prediction Model of Vertically Composed Cloud Services via Tensor Factorization

2015· article· en· W1912570954 on OpenAlexaff
Raed Karim, Chen Ding, Ali Miri, Md Shahinur Rahman

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCaching and Content Delivery
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloud computingQuality of serviceComputer scienceSoftware as a serviceMobile QoSThe InternetEnd userSoftwareService providerService (business)Web serviceThroughputServices computingComputer networkWorld Wide WebSoftware developmentOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rapid growth of published cloud services in the Internet makes the service selection and recommendation a challenging task for both users and service providers. Services' QoS properties such as response time and throughput are often used to select the best of functionally equivalent services. In cloud environment, software services collaborate with other complementary services to provide complete solutions to end users. The service selection is done based on QoS requirements submitted by end users. Software providers alone cannot guarantee users' QoS requirements. These requirements must be end-to-end, representing all collaborating services in a solution. In this paper, we propose an end-to-end QoS prediction model for vertically composed services which are composed of three types of cloud services: software (SaaS), infrastructure (IaaS) and data (DaaS). It exploits historical QoS values and cloud services and users information to predict unknown end-to-end QoS values of composite services. The experiments demonstrate that our proposed model outperforms other prediction models in terms of the prediction accuracy. We also study the impact of different parameters on the prediction results. In the experiments, we used real cloud services' QoS data collected using our developed QoS monitoring and collecting system.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.780
Threshold uncertainty score0.334

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCaching and Content DeliveryFrench-language works237,207