MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116451280 · doi:10.1109/icns.2006.15

A Scalable Wide-Area Grid Resource Management Framework

2006· article· en· W2116451280 on OpenAlexaff
Mohamed El-Darieby, Diwakar Krishnamurthy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed and Parallel Computing Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceScalabilityDistributed computingGridGrid computingSemantic gridResource management (computing)Quality of serviceDRMAAResource (disambiguation)Overhead (engineering)Resource allocationDatabaseComputer networkWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Grid computing systems federate resources belonging to several organizations to support applications with large computation and storage needs. Effective resource management is crucial for realizing the promise of the grid. However, current grid resource management frameworks have a number of limitations including poor scalability, and inadequate support for quality of service (QoS). This paper describes a novel and scalable grid resource management framework that can address these limitations. The framework relies on a hierarchical organization of resources and resource managers (RM) within an organization. Resources are assigned to jobs through decentralized inter and intra organizational collaborations between RMs. The framework employs a hierarchical information aggregation scheme that permits scalable grid resource management. Such a capability allows more intelligent placement of workloads across the grid than is feasible with traditional resource managers. For example, loads can be balanced across the grid clusters to avoid over utilization of resources resulting in better QoS for jobs. Hierarchical segmentation of grid resources allows the framework to handle dynamic situations (e.g., failure recovery, and nodes joining the Grid). The improved scalability of the framework, however, comes at the price of incurring additional complexity and overhead. Sophisticated protocols need to be designed to build and provide the functionality of the hierarchy. Considering the benefits and limitations of our approach, we believe the hierarchical framework is best suited for managing planetary scale grid systems supporting "embarrassingly" parallel jobs that require computational resources beyond the borders of an organization

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)0.002
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
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 science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations14
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDistributed and Parallel Computing SystemsFrench-language works237,207