MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014161917 · doi:10.1109/3pgcic.2012.45

Multi-server MMO Middleware: Unlocked

2012· article· en· W2014161917 on OpenAlexafffund
Christopher Mcknight, C. Stubens, Yvonne Coady, Kin Fun Li

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPeer-to-Peer Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersUniversity of Victoria
KeywordsServerComputer scienceOverhead (engineering)Middleware (distributed applications)Consistency (knowledge bases)Distributed computingSynchronization (alternating current)Computer networkClientClient–server modelOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Massively multiplayer online (MMO) games consist of huge worlds populated by thousands of clients, far beyond the ability of a single server to maintain. This naturally leads to the division of the game world into many partitions, each controlled by a single server. To provide players with the illusion of a single large world, some MMO systems divide their game world across servers and synchronize all nearby activity between them. To accomplish and synchronize player movement and interaction between servers, a system of inter-server locks are employed. These locks introduce considerable software complexity and network traffic overhead. We discuss the practical problems of such locking systems, and present an alternate approach. A lockless middleware design is described which implements sequential consistency using inter-server remote writes. This approach provides consistency across all clients and servers, allowing for seamless movement of clients within an arbitrarily large game world. We compare the lockless architecture to the traditional locking design, and analyze its performance.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.224 · 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
GenreSoftware

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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPeer-to-Peer Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207