MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006216014 · doi:10.1109/sis.2013.6615176

A load-rebalance PSO heuristic for task matching in heterogeneous computing systems

2013· article· en· W2006216014 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
TopicDistributed and Parallel Computing Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParticle swarm optimizationComputer scienceMatching (statistics)HeuristicTask (project management)Swarm intelligenceMathematical optimizationMulti-swarm optimizationGrid computingCloud computingDistributed computingGridSwarm behaviourAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The idea of utilizing nature inspired algorithms to find optimal solutions to various real world NP complete optimization problems has been extensively explored by researchers. One such problem is task matching problem in heterogeneous distributed computing environments like Grid and Cloud. Researchers have explored Swarm Intelligence algorithm, Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO), to find optimal solution for task matching problem. In this study, we investigate the effectiveness of smallest position value (SPV) technique in mapping continuous version of PSO algorithm to the task matching problem in a heterogeneous computing environment. We show that the task matching generated by this technique will result in in-efficient resource utilization. Thus, we present a novel load rebalance based particle swarm optimization heuristic (PSO-LR) for efficient load distribution among available compute nodes even in heterogeneous computing environments.

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)0.001
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 score0.919
Threshold uncertainty score0.834

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.225 · 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