MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Research computing in a distributed cloud environment

2010· article· en· W2019349084 on OpenAlexaff
K Fransham, Arun Agarwal, P. Armstrong, A. Bruce Bishop, André Charbonneau, Ron Desmarais, N. Hill, Ian Gable, S. Gaudet, S. Goliath, Roger Impey, Colin Leavett-Brown, J. Ouellete, Matthew Paterson, C. J. Pritchet, D Penfold-Brown, W Podaima, D. Schade, Randall Sobie

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed and Parallel Computing Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoHerzberg Institute of AstrophysicsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloud computingComputer scienceVirtual machineSoftware deploymentDistributed computingCloud testingJob schedulerCloud computing securityResource (disambiguation)Operating systemComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The recent increase in availability of Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS) computing clouds provides a new way for researchers to run complex scientific applications. However, using cloud resources for a large number of research jobs requires significant effort and expertise. Furthermore, running jobs on many different clouds presents even more difficulty. In order to make it easy for researchers to deploy scientific applications across many cloud resources, we have developed a virtual machine resource manager ( Cloud Scheduler ) for distributed compute clouds. In response to a user's job submission to a batch system, the Cloud Scheduler manages the distribution and deployment of user-customized virtual machines across multiple clouds. We describe the motivation for and implementation of a distributed cloud using the Cloud Scheduler that is spread across both commercial and dedicated private sites, and present some early results of scientific data analysis using the system.

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)0.005
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.004

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.256 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations8
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Conference SeriesSame topicDistributed and Parallel Computing SystemsFrench-language works237,207