MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156054577 · doi:10.1109/scc.2008.64

SLA Negotiation System Design Based on Business Rules

2008· article· en· W2156054577 on OpenAlexaff
Mark Perry, Halina Kaminski

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicService-Oriented Architecture and Web Services
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNegotiationService-level agreementService levelComputer scienceService providerProcess managementService level objectiveService (business)Application service providerSoftware as a serviceBusiness processSoftwareService designBusinessKnowledge managementSoftware developmentMarketingTelecommunicationsQuality of serviceOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Service level agreements (SLAs) are commonly prepared and signed documents that form the contracts between a service provider and its customers, defining the obligations and liabilities of the parties. SLAs reflect the business needs of both customer and supplier as far as possible. SLAs are usually formed through either the adoption of a boiler plate agreement from the provider, or by negotiation between the parties. With the increasing adoption of software supply being implemented as a network service - software as a service (SaaS) - these methods are rigid or slow and costly. We propose a system that the parties can use to facilitate both fast and flexible agreements through the automation of SLA creation from a combination of service level objectives (SLOs) and business rules. We look at a means for generating these with a SLA-NM (SLA negotiation manager), complying with e-negotiation rules and creates agreements from existing business objectives.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.892
Threshold uncertainty score0.451

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations9
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicService-Oriented Architecture and Web ServicesFrench-language works237,207