MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129632267 · doi:10.1109/icpads.2006.40

Efficient compile-time task scheduling for heterogeneous distributed computing systems

2006· article· en· W2129632267 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad I. Daoud, Nawwaf Kharma

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed and Parallel Computing Systems
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceDynamic priority schedulingFair-share schedulingFixed-priority pre-emptive schedulingRate-monotonic schedulingTwo-level schedulingDistributed computingEarliest deadline first schedulingRound-robin schedulingScheduling (production processes)Parallel computingDeadline-monotonic schedulingScheduleMathematical optimizationOperating systemMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Efficient task scheduling is essential for obtaining high performance in heterogeneous distributed computing systems (or HeDCSs). Because of its key importance, several scheduling algorithms have been proposed in the literature, which are mainly for homogeneous processors. Few scheduling algorithms are developed for HeDCSs. In this paper, we present a novel task scheduling algorithm, called the longest dynamic critical path (LDCP) algorithm, for HeDCSs. The LDCP algorithm is a list-based scheduling algorithm that uses a new attribute to effectively compute the priorities of tasks in HeDCSs. At each scheduling step, the LDCP algorithm selects the task with the highest priority and assigns the selected task to the processor that minimizes its finish execution time using an insertion-based scheduling policy. The LDCP algorithm successfully generates task schedules that outperform, to the best of our knowledge, two of the best scheduling algorithms for HeDCSs

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations25
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDistributed and Parallel Computing SystemsFrench-language works237,207