MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151562655

Lightweight EDF Scheduling with Deadline Inheritance

2003· article· en· W2151562655 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

VenueUniversity of Twente Research Information · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReal-Time Systems Scheduling
Canadian institutionsBell (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceProgrammerScheduling (production processes)Distributed computingEarliest deadline first schedulingCorrectnessDynamic priority schedulingFixed-priority pre-emptive schedulingOperating systemRate-monotonic schedulingProgramming languageSchedule
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

EDFI is a lightweight real-time scheduling protocol that combines EDF with deadline inheritance over shared resources. We will show that EDFI is flexible during a tasks admission control, efficient with scheduling and dispatching, and straightforward in feasibility analysis. The application programmer only needs to specify a tasks timing constraints (deadline, period, runtime) and resource needs, after which EDFI can execute admission control, scheduling, dispatching and resource synchronisation automatically. EDFI avoids gratuitous task switching and its programming overhead as well as runtime overhead is very low, which makes it ideal for lightweight and featherweight kernels. We will illustrate the elegance of the underlying theory and we will shortly discuss the implementation of EDFI in three different operating 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.891
Threshold uncertainty score0.349

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.005
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.226 · 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