MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023875947 · doi:10.1145/1958746.1958822

Towards studying the performance effects of design patterns for service oriented architecture

2011· article· en· W2023875947 on OpenAlexaff
Nariman Mani, Dorina C. Petriu, Murray Woodside

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicService-Oriented Architecture and Web Services
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSoftware deploymentContext (archaeology)WorkloadService-oriented architectureExploitSoftware design patternArchitectureDesign patternService (business)Distributed computingSoftware engineeringComputer architectureSystems engineeringSoftwareEngineeringWeb serviceOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Patterns employed for the development of a service oriented system may affect its non-functional properties, including performance. Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) design patterns provide generic solutions for many architectural, design and implementation problems, and any pattern may have an impact on performance, either positive or negative. This research considers how to characterize the performance impact of a SOA design pattern, which includes characterizing some aspects of the design and usage environment as a whole (for example, the scale of the workload and the availability of concurrent platforms for the eventual deployment). The approach uses performance models to characterize the application and the impact of the pattern on it. The planned approach exploits the context of model driven engineering (MDE) to give rapid feedback to developers about the potential impact of a pattern. Model transformations are used to generate the performance model, and to propagate the effect of applying a SOA design pattern to the performance model. The approach is sketched here with a preliminary case study, demonstrating its feasibility.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.804
Threshold uncertainty score0.584

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations9
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicService-Oriented Architecture and Web ServicesFrench-language works237,207