MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097439771 · doi:10.1109/waina.2008.110

Model-Driven Automation in Grid Environments

2008· article· en· W2097439771 on OpenAlexaffabout
Cameron Kiddle, Derek Kivi, Rob Simmonds

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed and Parallel Computing Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInteroperationComputer scienceDistributed computingAutomationGridGrid computingScheduling (production processes)ReuseSemantic gridSoftware engineeringInteroperabilityOperating systemEngineeringSemantic WebWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Grid computing environments are heterogeneous in terms of the types of computer systems, the applications being run, and the policies governing the use of systems. To support automation in such environments common models to describe systems, applications and scheduling policies are needed. Common models enable the interoperation and reuse of tools transparent to the underlying differences in the environment. This paper relates our experiences in using modelling to support automation in grid environments. We have developed RDF-based models for describing systems, applications and scheduling policy. A GT4-based grid environment consisting of computer systems from across Canada has been established with model information deployed and published via WS MDS. Several examples demonstrating the use of modelling to support automation in the established grid environment are presented.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDistributed and Parallel Computing SystemsFrench-language works237,207