MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050687058 · doi:10.1145/1082983.1083081

Policies, grids and autonomic computing

2005· article· en· W2050687058 on OpenAlexaff
Bradley Simmons, Hanan Lutfiyya

Bibliographic record

VenueACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed and Parallel Computing Systems
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceAutonomic computingContext (archaeology)Resource allocationGrid computingGridResource management (computing)Work (physics)Resource (disambiguation)Service levelService (business)Risk analysis (engineering)Process managementManagement scienceKnowledge managementDistributed computingBusinessEngineeringCloud computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goals of resource management fall within the overall aims of autonomic and grid computing, namely the sharing of resources automatically, and the allocation of resources depending on both application and business needs. Resource allocation can be guided by policies which encapsulate decisions made by the management system. Policies can be used to encapsulate many different types of management decisions including possible corrective actions when a performance requirement of an application is not being satisfied and actions to take place when there is more demand then supply. System policy is derived from the interactions between Service Level Agreements (contractual agreements between businesses) and locally specified management rules. This paper explores the potential use of mathematical models (e.g., optimisation models) for relating the various types of policies. It describes the current and proposed work in applying policies to resource management in the context of autonomic and grid computing systems.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.010
Scholarly communication0.0070.007
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations11
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering NotesSame topicDistributed and Parallel Computing SystemsFrench-language works237,207