MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103627184 · doi:10.1109/aswec.2008.4483221

An Extended Concurrency Control Service for CORBA

2008· article· en· W2103627184 on OpenAlexaff
Nima Sharifimehr, Samira Sadaoui

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings - Australian Software Engineering Conference/Proceedings · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed systems and fault tolerance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceConcurrency controlDistributed computingAtomicityDeadlockCommon Object Request Broker ArchitectureDistributed transactionScalabilityTransaction processingFault toleranceConcurrencyOptimistic concurrency controlSerializabilityDistributed concurrency controlMultiversion concurrency controlConcurrent computingDatabase transactionOperating systemDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Distributed transaction processing is the best solution for providing enterprise software systems with high performance. However, it needs an environment that assures consistency beside high concurrency. Therefore in this paper we extend the concurrency control service (CCS) of CORBA with new features, such as generic calling context, fault tolerance and deadlock management. The most outstanding feature of ECCS is the generic calling context that makes it applicable for both transactional and non-transactional clients. Through fault tolerance considerations, ECCS supports long-duration distributed transactions in addition to short-duration ones. Deadlock management efficiently prevents any deadlock occurrences. The experimentations show that we successfully included all the new capabilities with an acceptable amount of overhead and without negatively affecting the scalability of CCS.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.245
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings - Australian Software Engineering Conference/ProceedingsSame topicDistributed systems and fault toleranceFrench-language works237,207