MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077074898 · doi:10.1109/nof.2012.6464008

Cognitive behavior analysis framework for fault prediction in cloud computing

2012· article· en· W2077074898 on OpenAlexafffund
Reza Farrahi Moghaddam, Fereydoun Farrahi Moghaddam, Vahid Asghari, Mohamed Cheriet

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Computing and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueÉcole de Technologie SupérieureUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceProbabilistic logicDistributed computingRedundancy (engineering)Resilience (materials science)Focus (optics)Cloud computingComplex systemEvent (particle physics)Artificial intelligenceProbabilistic analysis of algorithmsNetwork topologyMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Complex computing systems, including clusters, grids, clouds and skies, are becoming the fundamental tools of green and sustainable ecosystems of future. However, they can also pose critical bottlenecks and ignite disasters. The complexity and high number of variables could easily go beyond the capacity of any analyst or traditional operational research paradigm. In this work, we introduce a multi-paradigm, multi-layer and multi-level behavior analysis framework which can adapt to the behavior of a target complex system. It not only learns and detects normal and abnormal behaviors, it could also suggest cognitive responses in order to increase the system resilience and its grade. The multi-paradigm nature of the framework provides a robust redundancy in order to cross-cover possible hidden aspects of each paradigm. After providing the high-level design of the framework, three different paradigms are discussed. We consider the following three paradigms: Probabilistic Behavior Analysis, Simulated Probabilistic Behavior Analysis, and Behavior-Time Profile Modeling and Analysis. To be more precise and because of paper limitations, we focus on the fault prediction in the paper as a specific event-based abnormal behavior. We consider both spontaneous and gradual failure events. The promising potential of the framework has been demonstrated using simple examples and topologies. The framework can provide an intelligent approach to balance between green and high probability of completion (or high probability of availability) aspects in 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 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 score0.783
Threshold uncertainty score0.461

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCloud Computing and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207