MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169497251 · doi:10.1109/ccgrid.2006.47

Gang scheduling and adaptive resource allocation to mitigate advance reservation impact

2006· article· en· W2169497251 on OpenAlexafffund
Angela C. Sodan, C. Doshi, Lawrence Barsanti, Daniel Taylor

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed and Parallel Computing Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsReservationComputer scienceScheduling (production processes)Distributed computingScheduleGridShared resourceProcessor schedulingMatching (statistics)Computer multitaskingComputer networkParallel computingOperating systemEngineeringOperations management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Simultaneous parallel computational grid jobs require reservation by the local job schedulers to ensure allocation of matching time slots at the different sites involved. However, reservations create road blocks in the local schedule, leading to only a small percentage of reservations being tolerable. A large number of reservations typically has adverse effects on local response times and machine utilization. We have extended our SCOJO scheduler to enable advance reservations. SCOJO can perform space sharing or gang scheduling and can run as either adaptive or traditional non-adaptive variant. We show that gang scheduling is more flexible than space sharing in regards to tolerating reservations. We also show that, for space sharing and a low multiprogramming level, the adaptive variants can tolerate reservations better than the non-adaptive variants.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations29
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDistributed and Parallel Computing SystemsFrench-language works237,207