MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2320309422 · doi:10.1109/tii.2016.2543258

Cost-Efficient Remote Backup Services for Enterprise Clouds

2016· article· en· W2320309422 on OpenAlexaff
Yu Hua, Xue Liu, Dan Feng

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCaching and Content Delivery
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsNeptuneComputer scienceBackupCloud computingData deduplicationRedundancy (engineering)ServerHash functionOperating systemComputer networkDistributed computingDatabaseComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to efficiently achieve fault tolerance in cloud computing, large-scale data centers generally leverage remote backups to improve system reliability. Due to long-distance and expensive network transmission, the backups incur heavy communication overheads and potential errors. To address this important problem, we propose an efficient remote communication service, called Neptune. Neptune efficiently transmits massive data between long-distance data centers via a cost-effective filtration scheme. The filtration in Neptune is interpreted as eliminating redundancy and compressing similarity of files, which are generally studied independently in the existing work. In order to bridge their gap, Neptune leverages chunk-level deduplication to eliminate duplicate files and uses approximate delta compression to compress similar files. Moreover, in order to reduce the complexity and overheads, Neptune uses a locality-aware hashing to group similar files and proposes shortcut delta chains for fast remote recovery. We have implemented Neptune between two data centers and their distance is more than 1200 km via a 2 Mb/s network link. We examine the Neptune performance using real-world traces of Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), EMC, and Campus collection. Compared with state-of-the-art work, experimental results demonstrate the efficiency and efficacy of Neptune.

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)0.000
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.558

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Industrial InformaticsSame topicCaching and Content DeliveryFrench-language works237,207