MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995701562 · doi:10.1177/0037549709102484

Class-Based Grid Resource Management Strategies for On-Demand Jobs

2009· article· en· W1995701562 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

VenueSIMULATION · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed and Parallel Computing Systems
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMatching (statistics)GridWorkloadGrid computingDistributed computingResource allocationVariety (cybernetics)Function (biology)Resource management (computing)A priori and a posterioriService (business)Resource (disambiguation)Shared resourceOperations researchKnowledge managementArtificial intelligenceBusinessComputer securityComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Grid computing has emerged as a new paradigm for distributed systems, which promotes sharing of distributed resources. To maximize its benefits, it is essential to discover the resources available on the grid, and then effectively map the jobs to the resources for maximizing a given objective function. This paper focuses on the problem of matching of jobs to resources in a computing grid. Jobs are classified based on their service demands. Matching policies that use only the knowledge of job classes are introduced in this paper; simulation experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of these policies. Under a variety of different workload parameters the proposed matching policies demonstrate a performance comparable to, or better than, the well-known Minimum Completion Time matching policy, which is based on detailed a priori knowledge of jobs and resource characteristics.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.383

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.268 · 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