MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2294182782 · doi:10.5555/2876341.2876360

An adaptive fault-tolerance scheme for distributed load balancing systems

2015· article· en· W2294182782 on OpenAlexaff
Dan Liu, Robson E. De Grande, Azzedine Boukerche

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Simulation Symposium · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed and Parallel Computing Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistributed computingLoad balancing (electrical power)Computer scienceFault toleranceLoad managementNetwork Load Balancing ServicesInterruptServerComputer networkEngineeringEmbedded system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Load balancing of distributed virtual simulations has been developing into a critical mechanism for enabling these simulations as their complexity grows to model more realistic scenarios. As the scale of these systems increases, they become more susceptible to load imbalances caused by the heterogeneity and non-dedication of resources and by their own simulation load oscillations. Due to its importance, many balancing systems have been designed for distributed simulations. Nevertheless, none of the previous systems consider the existence of failures in their own systems, which can partially hamper or completely interrupt their balancing capabilities. Therefore, a fault-tolerant mechanism is introduced for load balancing systems to keep some minimal services running properly or enable the recovery of components when faults unpredictably occur. The proposed solution employs election and grouping tools to reconfigure the balancing system dynamically. Experiments have been conducted in order to evaluate the benefit of the proposed fault-tolerant balancing system.

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)0.002
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 score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Simulation SymposiumSame topicDistributed and Parallel Computing SystemsFrench-language works237,207