MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143889951 · doi:10.1145/1216895.1216898

A performance analysis method for autonomic computing systems

2007· article· en· W2143889951 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Autonomous and Adaptive Systems · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed systems and fault tolerance
Canadian institutionsIBM (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceAutonomic computingWorkloadDistributed computingProvisioningCloud computingComputer networkOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In an autonomic computing system, an autonomic manager makes tuning, load balancing, or provisioning decisions based on a predictive model of the system. This article investigates performance analysis techniques used by the autonomic manager. It looks at the complexity of the workloads and presents algorithms for computing the bounds of performance metrics for distributed systems under asymptotic and nonasymptotic conditions, that is, with saturated and nonsaturated resources. The techniques used are hybrid in nature, making use of performance evaluation and linear and nonlinear programming models. The workloads are characterized by the workload intensity , which represents the total number of users in the system, and by the workload mixes , which depict the number of users in each class of service. The results presented in this article can be applied to distributed transactional systems. Such systems serve a large number of users with many classes of services and can thus be considered as representative of a large class of autonomic computing systems.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.935
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.255 · 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