MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969434100 · doi:10.1145/2523616.2523632

Consistency without borders

2013· article· en· W1969434100 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Peter Alvaro, Peter Bailis, Neil Conway, Joseph M. Hellerstein

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed systems and fault tolerance
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Information and Intelligent SystemsAir Force Office of Scientific ResearchDivision of Graduate EducationDefense Advanced Research Projects AgencyDirectorate for Computer and Information Science and EngineeringNippon Telegraph and TelephoneSamsungVMwareEMCNetAppNational Science FoundationGoogleMicrosoftOracleDivision of Computer and Network SystemsDivision of Computing and Communication FoundationsNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCisco SystemsFacebookSAP North AmericaGeneral ElectricIntel Corporation
KeywordsConsistency (knowledge bases)Computer scienceConsistency modelLinearizabilitySequential consistencyWeak consistencyCausal consistencyEventual consistencyData consistencyStrong consistencyDistributed computingProgramming languageArtificial intelligenceMathematicsCorrectnessStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Distributed consistency is a perennial research topic; in recent years it has become an urgent practical matter as well. The research literature has focused on enforcing various flavors of consistency at the I/O layer, such as linearizability of read/write registers. For practitioners, strong I/O consistency is often impractical at scale, while looser forms of I/O consistency are difficult to map to application-level concerns. Instead, it is common for developers to take matters of distributed consistency into their own hands, leading to application-specific solutions that are tricky to write, test and maintain.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.007
Scholarly communication0.0090.023
Open science0.0040.013
Research integrity0.0030.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.006

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations28
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDistributed systems and fault toleranceFrench-language works237,207