MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126547925 · doi:10.14778/1920841.1920906

MRShare

2010· article· en· W2126547925 on OpenAlexaff
Tomasz Nykiel, Michalis Potamias, Chaitanya Mishra, George Kollios, Nick Koudas

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the VLDB Endowment · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Computing and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCloud computingBatch processingContext (archaeology)Distributed computingWork (physics)Core (optical fiber)DatabaseOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Large-scale data analysis lies in the core of modern enterprises and scientific research. With the emergence of cloud computing, the use of an analytical query processing infrastructure (e.g., Amazon EC2) can be directly mapped to monetary value. MapReduce has been a popular framework in the context of cloud computing, designed to serve long running queries (jobs) which can be processed in batch mode. Taking into account that different jobs often perform similar work, there are many opportunities for sharing. In principle, sharing similar work reduces the overall amount of work, which can lead to reducing monetary charges incurred while utilizing the processing infrastructure. In this paper we propose a sharing framework tailored to MapReduce. Our framework, MRShare, transforms a batch of queries into a new batch that will be executed more efficiently, by merging jobs into groups and evaluating each group as a single query. Based on our cost model for MapReduce, we define an optimization problem and we provide a solution that derives the optimal grouping of queries. Experiments in our prototype, built on top of Hadoop, demonstrate the overall effectiveness of our approach and substantial savings.

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)0.005
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 score0.184
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1840.129

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations226
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the VLDB EndowmentSame topicCloud Computing and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207