MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156605140 · doi:10.17722/ijrbt.v3i1.93

Designing an Optimal Cloud Migration Strategy

2013· article· en· W2156605140 on OpenAlex
Dr.Ananthi Seshasaayee, Sreevidya Subramanian

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Research in Business and Technology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Data Security Solutions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloud computingGlobeComputer scienceProcess (computing)Computer securityCloud computing securityBusinessRisk analysis (engineering)Process managementOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper; we highlight the important aspects to be considered in designing an optimal cloud migration strategy. Cloud is today’s hype, it not only provides enterprises a means to reduce the carbon foot print and cost but also provides ease of use and networking across the globe. It helps enterprises maintain a common process ground for all their business needs. Day-by-Day we are seeing growth in enterprises switching to cloud. The methodology is defined as Cloud Migration. Despite of successful migration to cloud, many enterprises are suffering from security and other vulnerabilities in not only accessing but also maintaining their data in the cloud. We have taken this as our ground and we are trying to identify a secure way of migrating to cloud .

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.410
Threshold uncertainty score0.318

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.308 · 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