MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007829517 · doi:10.1109/ncca.2012.28

Supporting Apps in the Personal Cloud: Using WebSockets within Hybrid Apps

2012· article· en· W2007829517 on OpenAlexaff
Rahnuma Kazi, Xiaobo Zhang, Ralph Deters

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloud computingComputer scienceCloud testingSoftware as a serviceFlexibility (engineering)VirtualizationUtility computingCloud computing securityContext (archaeology)SoftwareService (business)World Wide WebComputer securityOperating systemSoftware developmentBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cloud Computing [1,2] is a "utility computing model" (John McCarthy, 1961), that allows the purchase of virtualized hardware (Infrastructure as a Service, IaaS), software platforms (Platform as a Service, PaaS) or applications/functionality (Software as a Service, SaaS) in a pay-as-you-go manner, comparable to the metered purchase of electricity, gas or water. Seen in the past primarily as a means for organizations to increase their flexibility, cloud computing has begun to enter the consumer space by offering solutions to personal computing needs that are based on virtualization e.g. cloud storage. Accessing such cloud services with tablets and smartphones enables user and context aware cloud services resulting in a personal(ized) cloud. This personal cloud allows users to access data and services via their mobile devices which in turn allows time, location and device independent computing. This paper focusses on the infrastructure challenges of enabling the personal cloud and presents an evaluation of our consumer-centric cloud portal (C3P).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIoT and Edge/Fog ComputingFrench-language works237,207