MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023886997 · doi:10.1145/1321211.1321226

Policy-driven autonomic management of multi-component systems

2007· article· en· W2023886997 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of CASCON · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicService-Oriented Architecture and Web Services
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeuristicsComponent (thermodynamics)Computer scienceAutonomic computingProcess managementRisk analysis (engineering)BusinessCloud computingOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Policies have been proposed as a means to express required or desired behavior of systems and applications, and possible management actions for resolving violations, to an autonomic manager. In multi-component systems, such as e-commerce systems, independent sets of policies often deals with managing the behavior of the individual components. In turn, the autonomic management system uses the policies to make decisions on what actions to take per component when a policy is violated. During operation of these multi-component systems, however, these independent sets of policies may yield multiple directives from which the autonomic manager must select one or more appropriate actions. In this work we look at heuristics that an autonomic manager might use to select an action. We outline the design and implementation of an autonomic manager making use of these heuristics and describe our experiences with it in a dynamic Web server. Experimental results are reported comparing the effectiveness of the heuristics.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.822
Threshold uncertainty score0.582

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.249
Teacher spread0.237 · 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