MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988918096 · doi:10.1145/1453175.1453177

Image management in a virtualized data center

2008· article· en· W1988918096 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

VenueACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Computing and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVirtualizationProvisioningScalabilityComputer scienceData centerWorkloadCloud computingVirtual machineProtocol (science)Big dataDistributed computingOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Industrial research firms such as Gartner and IDC are predicting an explosion in the number of online services in the coming years. Virtualization technologies could play an important role in such a world, as they create an opportunity to provide services in a cost-effective manner. However, to achieve ideal savings, more dynamic environments must be created, with Virtual Machines (VMs) being provisioned and altered on-the-fly. Management issues arise when using these elastic resources at scale. In this study, we provide an initial investigation of performance and scalability issues for image management in a virtualized data center. Results provided show that the choice of storage solution and access protocol matters. For example, our tests show the time to start a VM from a local hard drive under I/O intensive workload increases by a factor of 15 and for certain shared storage options, this factor increases to 30 times.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score0.715

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0040.003
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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.228 · 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