MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090125559 · doi:10.1145/2484402.2484410

RAFR

2013· article· en· W2090125559 on OpenAlexaff
Sumanta Sarkar, Reihaneh Safavi–Naini, Liang Feng Zhang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Data Security Solutions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRedundancy (engineering)Computer scienceCloud computingErasure codeData redundancyCloud storageDatabaseOperating systemDecoding methodsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cloud storage services have been increasingly popular in recent years. To provide guarantee against possible drive failures and crashes, data must be stored with redundancy on multiple drives. In this paper, we propose Remote Assessment of File Redundancy (RAFR), with the goal of providing guarantee to users that the cloud has stored data in k + Ψ drives, for some Ψ < 0, and so up to Ψ drive failures can be tolerated. In RAFR, cloud encodes the data using an (n, k) MDS erasure code and stores it in n drives. The user can verify that at least k drives are holding the encoded data and so the data is recoverable. Our analysis shows that the value of Ψ is n -- k -- ω(log n).

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.973
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0270.014

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.215 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCloud Data Security SolutionsFrench-language works237,207