MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2301123520 · doi:10.1142/s1793962316410026

Modeling and simulation as a service architecture for deploying resources in the Cloud

2016· article· en· W2301123520 on OpenAlexafffund
Sixuan Wang, Gabriel Wainer

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Complex Systems · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicSimulation Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCloud computingComputer scienceScalabilityDistributed computingService (business)ArchitectureSoftware deploymentMiddleware (distributed applications)Service-oriented modelingResource (disambiguation)Cloud testingVariety (cybernetics)Service-oriented architectureUtility computingWeb serviceCloud computing securityApplications architectureSoftware engineeringWorld Wide WebComputer networkDatabaseOperating systemSoftware architectureSoftwareArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, Cloud Computing has become popular to facilitate the use of Modeling and Simulation (M&S) resources. Nevertheless, there are still various issues to solve, including the structure constrain of chosen web service frameworks, the sharing of varied resources in the Cloud, and the difficulties in reproducing experiments. We show a new architecture based on Cloud Computing and new modeling methods to deal with these issues. This layered architecture, called Cloud Architecture for Modeling and Simulation as a Service (CAMSaaS), simplifies the deployment of M&S resources as services in the Cloud. CAMSaaS supports hierarchical resource services, experimental frameworks, scalable infrastructure and makes everything as a service. We deploy varied M&S resources as services in the Cloud, and build a Modeling and Simulation as a Service (MSaaS) middleware called CloudRISE to manage a variety of M&S resources. We also use the experimental framework concept to simplify the management of experiment environments. We present a case study for crowd evacuation application using the architecture.

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)0.002
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.148
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Citations15
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Complex SystemsSame topicSimulation Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207