MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166851328 · doi:10.1109/hpcc.2012.49

Cloud Resource Provisioning to Extend the Capacity of Local Resources in the Presence of Failures

2012· article· en· W2166851328 on OpenAlexaff
Bahman Javadi, Parimala Thulasiraman, Rajkumar Buyya

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Computing and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProvisioningCloud computingComputer scienceDistributed computingScheduling (production processes)Probabilistic logicVirtual machineResource (disambiguation)Computer networkOperating systemMathematical optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we investigate Cloud computing resource provisioning to extend the computing capacity of local clusters in the presence of failures. We consider three steps in the resource provisioning including resource brokering, dispatch sequences, and scheduling. The proposed brokering strategy is based on the stochastic analysis of routing in distributed parallel queues and takes into account the response time of the Cloud provider and the local cluster while considering computing cost of both sides. Moreover, we propose dispatching with probabilistic and deterministic sequences to redirect requests to the resource providers. We also incorporate check pointing in some well-known scheduling algorithms to provide a fault-tolerant environment. We propose two cost-aware and failure-aware provisioning policies that can be utilized by an organization that operates a cluster managed by virtual machine technology and seeks to use resources from a public Cloud provider. Simulation results demonstrate that the proposed policies improve the response time of users' requests by a factor of 4.10 under a moderate load with a limited cost on a public 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.

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)0.002
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.466
Threshold uncertainty score0.393

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations24
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCloud Computing and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207