MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150914379 · doi:10.1109/tpds.2012.182

Analysis of a Pool Management Scheme for Cloud Computing Centers

2012· article· en· W2150914379 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

VenueIEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Computing and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloud computingComputer scienceVirtualizationResource management (computing)Distributed computingTask (project management)Capacity planningScheme (mathematics)Set (abstract data type)Resource allocationData centerResource (disambiguation)Computer networkOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we propose an analytical performance model that addresses the complexity of cloud centers through distinct stochastic submodels, the results of which are integrated to obtain the overall solution. Our model incorporates the important aspects of cloud centers such as pool management, compound requests (i.e., a set of requests submitted by one user simultaneously), resource virtualization and realistic servicing steps. In this manner, we obtain not only a detailed assessment of cloud center performance, but also clear insights into equilibrium arrangement and capacity planning that allows servicing delays, task rejection probability, and power consumption to be kept under control.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.915
Threshold uncertainty score0.646

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.229 · 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