Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coscheduling is a technique used to improve the performance of parallel computer applications under time sharing, i.e., to provide better response times than standard time sharing or space sharing. Dynamic coscheduling and gang scheduling are two main forms of coscheduling. In SCOJO (Share-based Job Coscheduling), we have introduced our own original framework to employ loosely coordinated dynamic coscheduling and a dynamic directory service in support of scheduling cross-site jobs in grid scheduling. SCOJO guarantees effective CPU shares by taking coscheduling effects into consideration and supports both time and CPU share reservation for cross-site job. However, coscheduling leads to high memory pressure and still involves problems like fragmentation and context-switch overhead, especially when applying higher multiprogramming levels. As main part of this thesis, we employ gang scheduling as more directly suitable approach for combined space-time sharing and extend SCOJO for clusters to incorporate adaptive space sharing into gang scheduling. We focus on taking advantage of moldable and malleable characteristics of realistic job mixes to dynamically adapt to varying system workloads and flexibly reduce fragmentation. In addition, our adaptive scheduling approach applies standard job-scheduling techniques like a priority and aging system, backfilling or easy backfilling. We demonstrate by the results of a discrete-event simulation that this dynamic adaptive space-time sharing approach can deliver better response times and bounded relative response times even with a lower multiprogramming level than traditional gang scheduling.Dept. of Computer Science. Paper copy at Leddy Library: Theses & Major Papers - Basement, West Bldg. / Call Number: Thesis2004 .H825. Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 43-01, page: 0237. Adviser: A. Sodan. Thesis (M.Sc.)--University of Windsor (Canada), 2004.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
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".