MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106792588 · doi:10.1109/waina.2010.168

A Framework for Performing Statistical Testing of Distributed Systems

2010· article· en· W2106792588 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Horie, Stephen W. Neville, Chris L. Mueller, Fiona K Warman

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTestbedSoftware deploymentComputer scienceObstacleSoftwareService (business)Scale (ratio)The InternetThroughputDistributed computingSoftware engineeringWorld Wide WebOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A major obstacle facing developers of large-scale distributed applications is deployment of the software under real-world conditions. While the product may hold up under lab conditions, it can fail horribly when faced with actual users using the service over the Internet. Part of the problem lies in the fact that there is very little support for software developers to examine the true behavioral nature of their software at scale. In order to determine this nature, it is important to be able reproduce a large number of different, realistic environmental conditions repeatedly and consistently. Without this ability, it becomes very difficult to argue that the observed behavior is truly representative of the system. Put in a different perspective, while characteristics like average throughput, response delay, and time between failures can be computed based on the lab results, it is unclear whether these measurements do indeed capture the true statistical properties of the system, as opposed to a momentary, rare blip. This work presents a prototype implementation of a framework that allows automated testing, including repeatable experiments (as required by the tenets of the scientific method), sweeping through experiment parameters, and supporting the ability to engage in closed-loop testing. The intention of this prototype effort is to build on top of existing testbed capabilities, such as those provided by Emulab. The results of using this prototype framework to test an industry-held distributed system, and to research collaborative worm propagation mitigation strategies, are shown.

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)0.039
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.077
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.207

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0390.077
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.005
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0070.004
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.248 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNetwork Security and Intrusion DetectionFrench-language works237,207