MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044316154 · doi:10.1109/ainaw.2007.210

Interaction Analysis of Heterogeneous Monitoring Data for Autonomic Problem Determination

2007· article· en· W2044316154 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.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware System Performance and Reliability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceLeverage (statistics)ScalabilityData miningXMLEclipseData integrationSystem monitoringInformation overloadVariety (cybernetics)Distributed computingReal-time computingDatabaseMachine learningArtificial intelligenceOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Autonomic systems require continuous self-monitoring to ensure correct operation. Available monitoring data exists in a variety of formats, including log files, performance counters, traces, and state and configuration parameters. Such heterogeneity, together with the extremely large volume of data that could be collected, makes analysis very complex. To allow for more-effective problem determination, there is a need for a comprehensive integration of management data. In addition, monitoring should be adaptive to the current perceived operation of the system. In this paper we present an architecture to meet the above goals. We leverage an open-source XML-based format for data integration and describe an approach to automatically adjust monitoring for diagnosis when anomalies are detected. We have implemented a partial prototype using an Eclipse-based open-source platform. We show the effectiveness of our prototype based on fault-injection experiments. We also study issues of disparity of data formats, information overload, scalability, and automated problem determination.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.929
Threshold uncertainty score0.202

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.292 · 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