MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978232743 · doi:10.1145/2663165.2663319

Stage-aware anomaly detection through tracking log points

2014· article· en· W1978232743 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware System Performance and Reliability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceAutomatic summarizationOverhead (engineering)Anomaly detectionSet (abstract data type)Anomaly (physics)Key (lock)Distributed File SystemOperating systemReal-time computingData miningInformation retrievalProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce Stage-aware Anomaly Detection (SAAD), a low-overhead real-time solution for detecting runtime anomalies in storage systems. Modern storage server architectures are multi-threaded and structured as a set of modules, which we call stages. SAAD leverages this to collect stage-level log summaries at runtime and to perform statistical analysis across stage instances. Stages that generate rare execution flows and/or register unusually high duration for regular flows at run-time indicate anomalies. SAAD makes two key contributions: i) limits the search space for root causes, by pinpointing specific anomalous code stages, and ii) reduces compute and storage requirements for log analysis, while preserving accuracy, through a novel technique based on log summarization. We evaluate SAAD on three distributed storage systems: HBase, Hadoop Distributed File System (HDFS), and Cassandra. We show that, with practically zero overhead, we uncover various anomalies in real-time.

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.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.791
Threshold uncertainty score0.354

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.248
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