MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2165358822 · doi:10.1504/ijhpcn.2011.038704

Grid resources valuation with fuzzy real option

2011· article· en· W2165358822 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

VenueInternational Journal of High Performance Computing and Networking · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceGridValuation (finance)Fuzzy logicQuality of serviceGrid computingOperations researchMathematical optimizationFinanceComputer networkEconomicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, we model pricing of grid/distributed computing resources as a problem of real option pricing. Grid resources are non-storable compute commodities (e.g., CPU cycles, memory, etc.). The non-storable characteristic feature of the grid resources hinders it from fitting into a risk-adjusted spot price model for pricing financial options. Grid resources users pay upfront to acquire and use grid compute cycles in the future, for example, six months. The user expects a high and acceptable degree of satisfaction expressed as the quality of service (QoS) assurance. This requirement further imposes service constraints on the grid because it must provide a user-acceptable QoS guarantee to compensate for the upfront value. This study integrates three threads of our research; pricing the grid compute cycles as a problem of real option pricing, modelling grid resources spot price using a discrete time approach, and addressing uncertainty constraints in the provision of QoS using fuzzy logic. We have proved the feasibility of this model through experiments and we have presented some of our pricing results and discussed them.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.519
Threshold uncertainty score0.288

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.193 · 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