MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154595863 · doi:10.1002/smr.285

Migrating to Web services: a performance engineering approach

2004· article· en· W2154595863 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

VenueJournal of Software Maintenance and Evolution Research and Practice · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware System Performance and Reliability
Canadian institutionsIBM (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScalabilityWeb serviceSoftware deploymentComputer scienceMiddleware (distributed applications)Web engineeringWorld Wide WebWS-PolicyWeb modelingLatency (audio)Web developmentService-oriented architectureWeb application securitySoftware engineeringDistributed computingTelecommunicationsDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this paper we look at several performance pitfalls that Web services are facing today and at the performance penalties that have to be paid when exposing a legacy application as a Web service. We investigate two performance metrics of Web services, latency and scalability, and compare them with those of legacy middleware. The goal of the paper is to show how the performance penalties can be mitigated by following the principles and methods of performance engineering. Performance models can help the migration decisions, especially when new architectures or new deployment topologies are sought. The paper shows the mechanisms of building and solving a performance model involving Web services. An example is presented throughout the paper. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.282
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.269 · 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